Calling all South Dakota-class (BB-57) fans!

[Dave Hill]

Thanks, Martin!


Dave

[rtheriaque]

I'm building a 1943 Massachusetts using a Hasagawa Alabama as the base. Does anything exist to help with the deck or port side camo pattern? I have plenty with the starboard side...

[MartinJQuinn]

I'm building a 1943 Massachusetts using a Hasagawa Alabama as the base. Does anything exist to help with the deck or port side camo pattern? I have plenty with the starboard side...

In 1943, Massachusetts was in Ms22, the graded scheme. Are you doing her in the Ms12 modified pattern she wore in early 1942? If so, the pattern is - IIRC - the same on both sides.

[rtheriaque]

Sorry- I should have reviewed my post more clearly. I received a new bottle of Scotch for my birthday

I'm building her up for her encounter with the Jean Bart. I believe she was in the Measure 12 camoflage during that time. I have one picture of the port side that makes it look a little like the splatter on the port side of the funnel looked like a starfish. The paint is obviously quite weathered, however, so I could be completely wrong.

[Bob Dedmon]

A friend is looking for the pattern of the camo scheme for Indy during this time.

[Mr. Grumpy]

http://www.shipcamouflage.com/measure_12_modified.htm

from snyder and short's camo site. it just lists this for Indiana for 1942, no specific month listed.

[Tracy White]

There were no official plans for Measure 12 drawn up. Navsource has some pictures of her at this time but they're a little outside what I expect for Ms 12. I'll see if I can get some good commentary for you....

[Jerry Phillips]

I believe that Indiana wore a rare MS-15 (one of only a few known), not MS-12R. I do know that there was an attempt to match the port pattern to the starboard pattern. I do know that she had painted into a more sedate MS-22 by the time she reported for combat, late 1942.

Jerry Phillips

[Ron Smith]

I believe that Indiana wore a rare MS-15 (one of only a few known), not MS-12R. I do know that there was an attempt to match the port pattern to the starboard pattern. I do know that she had painted into a more sedate MS-22 by the time she reported for combat, late 1942.

Jerry Phillips

Ms-15 called for pink and green in the pattern, Indiana is not Ms-15. Ms-12R (revised) substitutes 5-N for 5-S for the straight graded Ms-12, Ms-12mod (modified) is the splotch pattern. In 1942 Indiana wore Ms-12mod with a few patches of white as did the DD Hobson for a short period. The few ships that had white in the pattern were an experiment with Ms-12mod and are usually erroneously referred to as the mysterious Ms-15.

[David Sandifer]

Indiana in Ms-12mod with white 5-U for the fourth color? Please give more details, Ron. I painted a 01SEP42 Hobson in the Ms-12mod 5-U, 5-H, 5-O, and 5-N scheme and it really stands out from the other DDs in my collection.

Jerry, I won't reverse the mask when I paint the p/s sides - they may be roughly similar, but the two sides are still very different; e.g., see navsource.org/archives/01/058/015813s.jpg and navsource.org/archives/01/015841.jpg.

References for my AUG/SEP42 Indiana include navsource.org and ussindianabb58.com photos, David C. Jones' "Building USS Indiana in 1/350th Scale" (Plastic Ship Modeler 1996/1), and John Sheridan's YKM-3013 resin&pe conversion kit.

Regards, David Sandifer

[russclark]

Sorry- I should have reviewed my post more clearly. I received a new bottle of Scotch for my birthday

I'm building her up for her encounter with the Jean Bart. I believe she was in the Measure 12 camoflage during that time. I have one picture of the port side that makes it look a little like the splatter on the port side of the funnel looked like a starfish. The paint is obviously quite weathered, however, so I could be completely wrong.

heres a pic of #12 and#22 will leave pic on for a week or so ,hope it helps

[rtheriaque]

Wow... Thanks!!!

My build is coming along well (for my admittedly low standards). Beyond the basic structure, I've used little of the original Alabama kit. Trumpeter's various kits (Baltimore, North Carolina, etc) have provided 40mm tubs, turrets (5" and 16"), directors, director tubs, and 20mm ammo lockers (I'm lucky I haven't lost a finger removing them). I've removed platform material and rebuilt splinter shields for the clearence for the crane. The 20mm lockers make all the difference in the world- it's an amazing transformation for something so simple.

I don't have the skill to fix the hull shape, nor the superstructure errors, but this will satisfy me until a better kit comes along.

[rtheriaque]

Also... Where does that pic come from? It's a MA reference I'm missing that I'd like to pick up.

[russclark]

Also... Where does that pic come from? It's a MA reference I'm missing that I'd like to pick up.

the book is massachusetts technical reference 2 got it from floating drydock or loyalhanna dockyard cant remember which one

[rtheriaque]

Man, how'd I miss that?

Ordered!

Thanks again.

[Sauragnmon]

Just a question... has anybody ever done a treaty-compliant SoDak, with the quad 14" gun turrets? I always had to wonder if that had ever been done, it was an idea I had come to my own mind whilst randomly thinking.

[rtheriaque]

Weren't the SoDaks designed from the ground up as 16" ships? I know the NoCals were designed for 14"...

I just finished (more or less) my conversion of a Hasagawa Alabama to a 1945-1946 Massachusetts. I used parts from GMM, Tom's, Tamiya Missouri, Trumpeter North Carolina (the ammo lockers were fantastic!), Trumpeter Baltimore, and probably some other stuff. I'll post pics at some point- she's not accurate, the gun tubs don't necessarily match, but she's a far sight from the original Alabama...

[Dick J]

Just a question... has anybody ever done a treaty-compliant SoDak, with the quad 14" gun turrets? I always had to wonder if that had ever been done, it was an idea I had come to my own mind whilst randomly thinking.

If the 14" gun had remained the standard, the North Carolina design would probably have been repeated with detail improvements (like stiffening aft to reduce the vibrations). Her armor was adequate for 14" gunfire. However, when the 16" gun became standard for new construction, North Carolina's guns could be upgraded (during construction) without a problem, but the armor was another matter. Therefore the North Carolina, as built, was unbalanced. That lead to another design being adopted for the follow-on class. The South Dakota was based on a 16" gunned design that was an alternative to the 14" design actually adopted for North Carolina. So, the SoDak design was intended for 16" guns from the beginning - no 14" gunned alternative plan. It was a very tight design; one which would not have happened had such drastic measures not been necessary to balance the design for 16" guns.

[Sauragnmon]

They were? Damn, I got the two backwards. My bad. I'd thought it was the SoDaks that had been planned for 16's but the treaty was active so they were to be built with 14's. Basically, as I'd heard somewhere, like a USN BB version of the Mogami CL/CA. Planned for near immediate conversion when possible. I could be wrong. Hey, that'd not be a first for me.

[Dave Hill]

Update: twin 5" mounts

The kit 5" mounts are simply horrible, I don't know what they were thinking when they engineered these parts but I gave up on the kit parts before completing even one mount...so I ordered some L' Arsenal 5" mounts and brass barrels...the resin castings are amazing!...the detail is crisp with no flash and in the case of my parts...no defects!...the detail of the castings are great OOB but I like the look of PE hatches, so I sanded off the molded on hatches...the mounts also have molded on hoods for the roof hatch...but all the wartime photos that I have show the turrets without them so I removed those also.

One of the kit's mounts

A L'Arsenal mount with PE hatches and .010" round stock to simulate the (what is that anyway) framing around the gun openings.

A L'Arsenal brass barrel in it's base.

Dave