The Ship Model Forum

I stand corrected this site automatically chops some of it off. Either link above should work.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

FOR JUNEAU MODEL BUILDERS

I just did a test shot on the cutting a pattern from paper and gluing it on and removing it after painting method described above. As I suspected less than satisfactory. I took a photo of the result if anyone needs proof.

Plan B if I cannot create computer assisted masks is one that I dread. It will involve placing tape on the superstructure and drawing the pattern from an adjacent photo, removing the tape, cutting the patterns, and applying the cut patterns. I also need to find a thin pencil that can be erased on masking tape. I suspect by the time the very labor intensive and eyeball draining process is complete I will be in a nut house, divorced or both. I am guessing the accuracy of that procedure will score about 70% at best. No doubt a lot of brush touch up will also be involved.

Based on my test shot the aft superstructure should be reasonably doable. As you can see on the 6/1/42 NYC broadside photo, the forward superstructure has a bunch of thin patterns and curves.

I do believe I will concentrate on the gun mounts, hull and other parts before subjecting myself to that ordeal. Perhaps I will get lucky and gimp will solve the problem.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

Fred,

I don't know if it would be any less trouble to use, but I have used a "paint-on" liquid mask on complex curved surfaces - like vent louvers and such. It dries as a thin rubber film. After it dries you can trim it with a sharp pointed hobby knife. After painting this mask can be peeled off.

Because you would be applying this by hand it wouldn't be as accurate as your paper mask method, but it can be used in places it would be impossible to get a good fit with the paper masks.

After seeing the complexity of some of the CLAA camo patterns I'm glad you are doing this and not me!

*****

I have noticed the canvas bloomers on the 5"/38 mounts on photos of many ships. I also noticed something similar on the 20mm guns while studying the Cleveland class ships (and probably on other classes). Many photos show the 20mm guns pointing straight up with "tents" hanging from the barrels and covering the mounts. In some photos it makes it easier to spot the 20mm guns.

Phil

Edit: The liquid mask I used was Microscale Micro Mask

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

The position of the 20mm guns has to do with the gun sight - earlier mounts (Mk 14 site, I believe) pointed the guns up to keep moisture from collecting in the gun sights whereas the later sights had this problem resolved. Rick has seen more documentation on this than I.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman

Tracy, has a hint of what was going on with the position of 20-mm guns, but here is the "Rest of the Story".

In photos of new ships of all sizes it is common to see the 20-mm guns stowed in the vertical position. Then you can find photos of them stowed in the horizontal position. I use to think this was just a "preference" of the crew. But, I came across a memo sent out to ALL builders and Navy Yards from BuOrd directing that 20-mm guns with the Mk 14 Gunsight needed to be STOWED in the HORIZONTAL position.

AS to why, first some background. The Mk 14 "lead angle" sight was developed specifically for use with the 20-mm gun. However, when the Mk 49 director program intended to be "THE" director for the new 40-mm gun mounts on most ships was delayed by development problems (never really solved), a stopgap director was developed utilizing the Mk 14 Gunsight. That "Simple" system was the Mk 51 director. The introduction of 40-mm guns in July 1942 was in part delayed because of a lack of Mk 51 (and Mk 49) directors. Since the Mk 14 Gunsight was a key part of the Mk 51 director, the Mk 14 Sight production priority was directed at Mk 51 production and wasn't installed onboard ship 20-mm guns until sometime in late 1942. I have not found any clear documentation as to when the first Mk 14 Gun Sight installs on 20-mm guns took place. But, for much of late 1942 and into early 1943 these Gunsights were rationed on ships, particularly destroyers.

Now for the memo. When the Mk 14 Gunsights were being installed, many yard personnel and ship crewmen continued to stow the 20-mm guns in the vertical position. Well, this would screw-up the Mk 14 gyro internals resulting in readjusting them for proper operation. The BuOrd memo spelled out that for the Mk 14 Sights to work properly that they needed to be stowed in the horizontal position until TURNED ON and then they could be operated in ANY position as designed.

In summary, if you see 20-mm guns in stowed in the vertical position, there is almost a 100% chance that they DO NOT have the Mk 14 gunsight installed. When delivered even quite late in the war, new ships didn't have the Mk 14 Gunsights installed. Installing the Mk 14 was many times a USN FITTING-OUT task. If the 20-mm gun are stowed in the horizontal position, it is most likely equipped with Mk 14 Gunsights. But, they don't have to be installed if the 20-mm gun is stowed in the horizontal position. Maintaining the guns and sights was normally done in the horizontal position, so when the sight was taken off to be worked on in the shop the guns remained in that position. The Mk 14 Gunsights were loved and hated by 20-mm gunners. Even late in the war some crews, would remove them, trusting their "own" marksmanship. (Putting them back-on when they went in for overhaul. ) Some ships appeared to remove some as spares for the Mk 51 directors.

None of the first four ATLANTA class cruisers would have likely had Mk 14 Gunsights installed prior to going to the Pacific. When they had them installed once they were in the Pacific is a question mark. Unlikely that ATLANTA or JUNEAU did. SAN JUAN may have during her September repairs at Pearl Harbor when she had additional 20-mm guns installed, I don't know.

Phil

Thanks for your suggestion. I tried using liquid mask a long time ago and wound up slicing the superstructure I put it on when I tried to remove it. With a kit no longer in production due to the risk of damage I will use tape or masks. However I will at some time be building a few YKM MS 12 mod DDs and may try liquid mask again on less complex patterns. Damage the hull and they will graciously replace it.

Yesterday I did the 2 5" wing mounts by hand. I came fairly close to the photos of them. I used a very thin brush. Impossible to achieve the really small curves but at least it gets maybe 60-70% accuracy. Trying to touch up small spots leads to brush marks/tiny paint blobs. I am in the process of wrapping a piece of masking tape around the mount drawing the pattern onto tape with pencil, darkening it with pen, and then cutting/applying the pattern and airbrushing it. I think it will work better. Due to the precise surgery required on the tape cutting I am guessing the procedure will take at least one hour per mount. Needless to say the ladders/barrels are not on yet. By the way I noticed in some of the early photos of Juneau the 5" barrels had random splotches of haze/ocean gray on the top of them, not deck blue as was the practice with a few of the others. I rather doubt that I will try to re create that and just make them ocean grey.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

DavidP

Thanks for the pencil suggestion. I have several here that have not worked on masking tape but my wife picked up some .5mm pencils I had never seen before. They worked better than the ones I have used.

The foam cutting board, I think I got it from Squadron, visible on page 2 of this WIP viewtopic.php?f=59&t=155871&start=20 has turned out to be the weapon of choice for doing the surgery on very small patterns for the gun mounts.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

JUNEAU MODEL BUILDERS/STUDENTS

This follows the message I put on here on 3/2/16 at 2011.

I neglected to include 2 facilities I contacted searching for ship photos--USNI photo collection and the Museum of the Pacific War in Fredericksburg TX. Both replied they cannot help.

Meanwhile another target has developed.

At a recent model meeting I had a chance to scan through the new USNI book The Big E Illustrated. On page 191 is a photo of the ships in Noumea harbor taken on 11/5/42. Enterprise is visible as are 2 BBs. Credit for the photo was the "Barr collection".

After some google trolling it appears William T Barr was a photographer on the ship. However he did not go on the ship until mid 43. It appears that somehow he got possession of multiple 1942 CV 6 photos that did not make it to NARA. The page 191 photo is one example I did not see it there last week. At this site is another one http://www.cv6.org/noumea/default.asp?u ... April+1942. I do not recall seeing that one either although it has been several years since I have done any Doolittle raid searches there. You will see several other photos from his collection on the CV 6 site. I am not a student of that ship and cannot say for sure if they are at NARA but I suspect not.

I sent emails to both the USNI and the Library of Congress, which has an interview with him and a few of his photos on their website, trying to find out who has custody of his collection. No luck finding that info via google search. My theory being one photo of Noumea on that date just might lead to another closer one or possibly a duplicate negative of the one in the book. The ships in the far background, of which one of them might be Juneau, are too far away to ID in the book photo. Perhaps better luck could come out of a negative. No response yet to either email.

If anyone out there has knowledge of who now has his collection please rattle my cage. He died in late 2014. In the event I get an email response, duplicate negative or original, or a closer range photo of Juneau from his collection I will put something here.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

Fred - you might try contacting the author of the book. One of my beefs with Squadron Publishing was that they kept trying to list photos that I passed on to David Doyle as "Tracy White Collection" despite me pushing for using the branch of archives they were located at. Anyone who reads that in the future is going to waste time trying to contact me as opposed to going straight to the source. It's possible the author knows where that collection is now or the provenance of some of the photos.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman

Per this site http://news.usni.org/2013/10/01/appreci ... -1918-2013
I am 2.5 years too late in any attempt to contact Cdr. Stafford. In any event the photo in question to my knowledge did not appear in any prior version and he would have nothing to do with this one.

The book appears to be a USNI Press publication. Unlike other illustrated history books I have seen there is no info on photo credits other than very brief "NARA" etc. captions adjacent to individual photos. There is nothing in the intro/prologue or index or anywhere else to give a clue how they got Barr photos. I called the USNI over a week ago and followed that with 2 emails. If all else fails I found out today I am going to have to get carpal tunnel/trigger finger surgery on my L hand sometime in the next 4-8 weeks so while recuperating from that if I cannot drag info out of them sounds like a great excuse to drop in on them in person and request an answer. Seem to recall they have very good seafood grazing in the local area down there, another great excuse for the trip. By the way my father was a life long USNI member after 1945 and I have been a member for over 20 years so it would appear to the untrained eye a more customer sensitive response would be in order but what do I know ha!

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

I have never heard "customer service" and "Naval Institute" in the same sentence!

Hopefully the Library of Congress has his collection for you, but I understand getting copies can be a little difficult at times. You might try dropping Rob Hanshew a line - he goes to the Library of Congress quite regularly.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman

Fred,

I don't know if you have been to the USNI or not in person. If you have and it hasn't been for about ten years, it is a little harder to get to them now. The security has been increased a whole lot since 911 changing the Academy from an "open campus" to a real Naval Station with real guards. You have to go to the main security gate and need to get a pass. You will need to call up the USNI Photo Collections person (down to ONE lady now) to make an appointment and she will forward notice of your visit to the security gate. The only other way to get on the Academy Grounds is with a Military/DoD Civilian ID or if you have a current DoD retiree CAC card. In either case you still need to call ahead and make an appointment. Also, parking on base near USNI building is a REAL BEAR.

Once you have made it to the USNI building and the Photo Library, the lady there is a real nice person. But, be NICE to her and realize she is a one person shop now (there use to be three or four people including volunteers in there) and have patience. The USNI file their photos by hull number and some by categories. I don't know if they file photos by the donor. USNI has some unique photos because they have received photos from many private individuals and they have part of some big name photographer's collections like from Ted Stone. Some photos from these sources are Official USN Photos and others can be commercial photos. So, USNI is concerned about violating copyrights and is careful about which images they will sell. Official USN Photos are fair game.

Also, Wm. T. Barr's collection of photos from USS ENTERPRISE were likely all USN Official Photos, even the ones he took. Since he was assigned as the (one of several) Ship's Photographers he had access to ALL the photos in the ship's files from before his assignment. He likely got or took some souvenirs, likely extras, as he left the ship at the end of the war. Hence, ANY photos taken by or of USS ENTERPRISE photographers will be Official USN Photos. I very much will bet that the same photos are SOMEWHERE in the 80-G Collection at NARA. The photo you linked of USS HORNET is one I have seen there in 80-G among a series of Doolittle Raiders images. Whether or not it is listed in the card catalog, I don't know. I have been going on "blind" searches through 80-G, I'm about with 65% through the 600,000 to 1,000,000 photos there. My guess is that only about 50-75% of the photos of a given ship are listed in the card catalog under the ship's name. The rest are either left as "NO NAME" ships and not even listed on the mounting card caption ... aka "Destroyer Escorting USS XXX" ... or the ship's name is on the mounting card caption correctly, but not on a card in the Catalog Card.

Rick

I am retired military and the ID card I have will get me on to the base with no problem. I was last there in June of 2012.

My thanks for the info on the photo collection lady. I hope either email or phone will cure the problem but if not she will be my first target when I go. I will probably not go there until I eliminate the Library of Congress as the possible depository for his collection.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

Fred,

I had to dig through old E-Mails to find her name, the lady I have been in contact with at USNI Photo, Video, and Audio Collections for a number of years is Janis Jorgensen. Really nice lady, but hard to get replies from her when she is busy or away on vacation, etc. I don't know if she is still there or not, the last time I was there at USNI was in March 2013. From the USNI website it looks like she is.

I found their ship photo collections to be an interesting group of photos, the Ted Stone and OUR NAVY collections are really nice quality photos. Since my prime interest is USN destroyers, particularly FLETCHER class, I found many unique photos. For me their best stuff is from the end of WWII into the post-WWII years. Several of the "missing" NHHC/NARA 80-G photos from the 1,000,000 number series (late 1950s into the 1960s) can be found there. Most of their WWII photos can be found at NARA. USNI has been scanning their photos and selling the digital copies. Much better than the old copy negative-to-prints. Interesting that there has been a crew of volunteers from USNI going to NARA and scanning photos every so often.

Good, a valid ID saves some time getting on base. But, you still need to call ahead and make an appointment with Janis to be sure she is going to be there.

Perhaps this will help:

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/article/ ... /312069979

Best,
David Doyle

Rick and David

I got an email from Janis Jorgenson on 3/11 while out all day and will call her tomorrow. It appears they have digital images of the Barr Collection sent to them by CV 6.org. More to follow once I call her.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

What follows below is mainly intended for Juneau history students vs model builders, with the exceptions noted in the 4th paragraph below.

I read Left to Die by Dan Kurzman about 20 years ago.

To see if it had info related to the model in progress I just re read most of it.

Below is a summary of interesting facts. Numbers are pages in the book. I am including info for anyone contemplating a diorama of the ship or survivors. However the majority of the info below is for history students vs model builders. Only the 50 cal info and references to nets mainly apply to model builders. I have long wondered why the explosion from the 2nd torpedo hit was so extreme. So if you do not have interest in these topics I suggest you stop here.

83 Mention of a 50 cal at Battle Station 2. Aerial photos of CL 53/54 show possible 50s forward of aft director but are not clear enough to confirm them as 50s.
99 S1C Friend cut the ropes to all rafts just prior to the first 11/13 battle starting.
108 Bridge hit by gunfire and most signalmen KIA. CO not hurt.
113 Speed 18 kts. after night battle
111/114/118 Damage from first torpedo—forward fireroom/engineroom flooded, plotting room out of commission, no TBS/ECM, mess hall shattered (possibly from gunfire hits)(Compartment diagram shows a mess area directly above forward engine room). Bow down 12’ after 1st hit, down 4’ just prior to 2nd torpedo hit. Juneau fires unknown number of torpedoes at IJN ships in night action. Multiple gunfire hits during surface action, bridge only one detailed. At time of 2nd hit steaming on one engine/prop only and steering power out of operation, rudder controlled manually. Due to TBS out ships nearby unable to warn Juneau even if they had ability to steer out of path of torpedo highly doubtful. Torpedo intended for San Francisco per post war contact with IJN sub CO. Only 2 torpedos fired due to grounding damage to the other 4 tubes.
120 Ships in Y formation. Juneau about 800 yards to starboard of San Francisco at base of stem of Y. Helena in front of San Francisco, DDs Fletcher L tip of Y and Sterret R tip of Y. Juneau at Alert 2.
125 2nd torpedo hits at 1101, possibly entered hole from first and then went off.
129 Survivor hears 2nd explosion after the initial large one
130 Stern vertical aft part highest (George Sullivan quoted elsewhere as saying it capsized. He was WIA by the first torpedo).
131 Rest of ship pitches forward and down.
133 A 5” mount that flew over Helena lands 100 yards behind Fletcher. Range from Fletcher to Juneau approx. one mile according to the book. Depending on the mod of the Mark 29 mount weight either 108/132,000 lbs.=54/66 tons.
142/44 Mention of nets in addition to rafts. Appears only 3 rafts made it to the surface.
144 A net rolled in canvas is mentioned. (The 6/1/42 broadside photo has what looks like a roll directly below the forward 20 MM gun, which in turn looks like the white objects visible below mount 3 in 80-G-304513)
149 3 rafts with 10 nets tied to them. Nets are used for more seriously wounded. As they die nets are discarded.
181 Down to 3 rafts and 3 nets by 11/18.
182 25 men abandoned in nets as healthy guys in rafts depart.

Of possible interest to Juneau students are the locations on the ship of some of the survivors. I could not find the one for Victor Fitzgerald in the book although he is mentioned. By the way the list of survivors in the book differs slightly from on line lists and I have no idea why. They are as follows

Battle Station 2 (Best I can figure from the book in the immediate vicinity of the aft director).

Arthur Friend
Joseph Hartney
Charles Wang (broken leg from the radar falling on it)
Lester Zook

Fantail

Alan Heyn
Frank Holmgren (both 20MM or 1.1 gunners)

Note—George and Albert Sullivan were in the same division. George was also on the fantail confirmed by the 2 men above. Book does not say where Albert was stationed. Per survivor stories in the book George found Albert but not Joseph who had a severe head wound. Both Albert and Joseph were dead within the first day. Book does not say if George knew that fact but suspect he at least knew about Albert. George drank salt water and swam away from the rafts and was quickly killed by 2 or 3 sharks after about 3 or 4 days if my memory is correct.

Inside a wing mount, which one not ID’d but suspect starboard.

Wyatt Butterfield (According to a copy of a letter I have from him to George Horton no other member of that mount crew got out).

Unfortunately if the author interviewed the other survivors he did not describe their battle stations.

Above we have 7 of 10 survivor battle station locations, plus George Sullivan confirmed on the fantail and possibly Albert Sullivan also. That confirms 8 people with known locations all aft of the aft stack.

The compartment diagram that George Horton sent to me shows the torpedo warhead magazine just forward of the steering gear room. Based on the fantail survivors it would appear safe to assume that did not blow up.

Unfortunately the diagram does not show the locations for the magazines for mounts 1-5. It does show them for the aft mounts 6-7. The powder magazines are directly below the mounts and the projectile magazines slightly forward of them. They appear to be just below the waterline. The aft engine room was almost directly below the torpedo launchers and slightly forward of the aft director, and obviously below the waterline, as was the torpedo warhead magazine.

I am not sure but I am guessing “Alert 2”=current Condition 2 as per this site http://www.combat.ws/S4/SAILOR/SAILOR.HTM and the condition Yoke at this site on page 12-11 http://seabeemagazine.navylive.dodlive. ... ter-12.pdf.

The question of the hour is whether the equivalent of Condition Zebra existed on Juneau at the time of the 2nd torpedo hit. From the severity of the explosion per witnesses on other ships, and especially a 5” mount winding up far forward of the ship, it would appear safe to assume the forward magazines blew up. The forward fire/engine rooms were already flooded and I leave it to the naval architects to figure out if the 2nd torpedo hit could have blown up the aft fire/engine rooms if the watertight doors were not closed. It would appear safe to guess but not provable that the water tight doors between the already damaged plot room just forward of the forward fire room and the forward mount magazines were not closed. Another interesting question WWII 5” powder was in the form of for lack of a better word blank rifle rounds with no bullet, which in turn were inside cases. You can see photos of 5” mount details at http://www.sarahsundin.com/through-wate ... r-gunnery/ and http://www.sarahsundin.com/wp-content/u ... ammo-2.jpg. Powder bags as in BB/CA ships were not involved. This website http://www.alternatehistory.com/discuss ... p?t=357658 says Atlanta class ships carried 7200 5” rounds but also mentions 40 MM rounds so it is not clear whether that number applies to 6 or 8 mounts. Assuming 8 that would be 900 rounds per gun mount which sounds high to me. How severe heat traveled from a hit roughly directly below the forward mast possibly through an already flooded fire room is a mystery. If the final torpedo hit further forward it is less of a mystery. From the witnesses quoted in the book there was no delay between the noise of the hit and total destruction, so I suspect the commentary about a hit in the same place as the first is mostly guess work. All of the above pure guesswork other than M80s and M16/60/79 rounds my explosive background is slim to zero. Most of the survivors are quoted as saying a lot of fuel came down on them but the compartment diagram does not show all of the fuel tanks. If anyone has a set of decent Atlanta class plans perhaps they can comment on this speculation. Last but not least if the light color objects in the 80-G-304513 photo below mount 3 are indeed nets as they appear to be, how did they survive the explosion of the magazines beneath them? Were they all wrapped in canvas, and did the canvas protect them from the blast? Were nets fitted further aft after Santa Cruz? If we have any physics/explosive majors residing in our midst and they are interested, perhaps they can help us on these topics.

My own best guess for what very little it is worth is that the second torpedo blew up at least 2 of the forward magazines and the second explosion one survivor described was the third magazine. The ship was vaporized back to somewhere in the vicinity of the boat deck or aft stack. According to the book a B 17 that arrived shortly after the explosion counted about 180 survivors, some of the survivors themselves gave counts in the 125-50 range. We have no record where the 125-50 came from on the ship other than the sailors above. I also have no idea how many sailors would be on or above decks in Alert 2. I would assume all lookouts and 20 MM/1.1 crews at a minimum. By contrast 487 sailors survived the magazine explosion on the RN BB Barham in 1941, which from the video on you tube appears to have been just as bad as the descriptions of the one on Juneau. Granted RN ships immediately rescued survivors and some got off before it capsized but otherwise the severity of the explosions seem comparable.

The book describes Capt. Swenson as being extremely concerned about the ship’s chances in a surface action long before it left the US. Sadly, he was proven correct on that issue.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

JUNEAU MODEL BUILDERS

Today I spoke with Janis Jorgenson at the USNI. She confirmed she has at least 6 CDs of Barr photos received from CV 6.org and refused to send me copies of any of them. She would allow me to look at them there if I go to the USNA. She referred me to Susan Brooke who helped publish the illustrated version of the Big E. I explained I was a USNI member and a model builder. She asked for and I gave her the location of my models on this site. I explained in great detail the type of Juneau photo I am looking for and why. She has an index of Barr photos by date and subject and promised to get back to me. She has both my phone number and email address. She promised to email me anything she finds.

Unless someone stumbles on to a NARA photo mis indexed that contains Juneau by accident this is probably the last chance that I can think of to find a photo of the ship in the fall of 42.

If anything productive comes of this I will put something here.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN

There's actually quite a few other possibilities, but they take a serious amount of time or luck to get to. I have a copy of a photo of Honolulu's first radar hut, but it was a one-off in a report I came across in Commander of Cruisers, PacFlt radar files. You'd have to literally go through all records to find them, but they could be "filed correctly" and just notlisted in any index due to the sheer volume of records. Not something you want to put any faith in, however.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman

I now have a high res copy of the photo that appears at http://www.cv6.org/noumea/default.asp?u ... ember+1942. Courtesy of the USNI.

I tried to upload it and got a message its size exceeds 200kib. Per properties it is 1.14 MB.

It seems to show at least 1 and I am guessing 2 CLAAs in the far distance. Too far for me to extract any color pattern details. Any photo expert that wants to take a whirl at the photo let me known.

If anyone has better computer skills than me rattle my cage and I will email you the photo if you think you can get it on this site. Martin Quinn to my knowledge is out of the loop for this site for awhile.

By the way the source of this photo per CV6.org is not William Barr but one Arnold W. Olson. USNI tells me they have no other Noumea photos. I am going to email the treasurer of the CV6 association to see if I can track down Mr. Olson or his collection to see if by some miracle closer range photos of this fleet exist.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN