Weebles wrote:Did anyone order and receive the Profile Morskie Arizona book? I ordered mine almost two months ago and have yet to receive it.
Dave
The one I ordered from White Ensign just arrived today. I... am extremely underwhelmed. There is one photo I've never seen before (looking aft over the fantail during the Sept. 1941 OS2U recovery procedure - the close-ups of the plane in the water and being eased back onto the catapult are pretty widely available), and there is an interesting notion presented that Arizona had unshielded 20mm Oerlikons and not .50 cal water-cooled machine guns mounted (annotations point to spots on photos of the wreck that do look a lot like skyward-pointing Oerlikons). Aside from that, there are ony 6 pages of drawings and one double-sided fold-out drawn at 1:500 scale. The fold-out is in color on one side, showing the ship in 5D/5L, with no red turret tops, and the 5D/5L demarkation line at the wrong level ont he foreward structure (they show it down where Pennsylvania's was, with the directors and rangefinders painted 5L) The octagonal engine access panels are shown as gray-painted steel, not wood planked as they should be. Fortunately, the drawings do not portray the avgas line on the wrong side. (Actually, they don't show it at all, as only the starboard side is drawn.) The drawings in the back of Stillwell's book are superior. I've been pleased with the Profile Morskie books I've purchased in the past, but this one is a real let-down.
Thinking again... maybe I'm acting like a spoiled brat. I'm fortunate enough to have the Stillwell book and a roll of plans for Arizona. The Profile Morskie book is an okay resource if you can't find or afford the other references. The small size makes it easier to handle, too. Just don't take the drawings as truly authoritative.
Thanks for the review, I think you saved me some dough. Until somebody finds a motherlode of previously unpublished pictures I think any future Arizona publications are going to be similar.
Cincpac File No.
A2-11/FF12(2)
S19/(50)
Serial 01594 UNITED STATES PACIFIC,
FLEET PENNSYLVANIA, Flagship
CONFIDENTIAL
Pearl Harbor, T. H. October 6, 1941.
PACIFIC FLEET CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE NO.15 CN-41
From: Commander-in-Chief, United States, Pacific Fleet
To : PACIFIC FLEET
Subject: Visibility of Ships - Camouflage Experiments.
Reference: (a) Cincpac Conf. ltr. S19/(50)/01445 of September 13, 1941.
(b) Cincpac Conf. ltr. S19/ (0457) of March 23, 1941.
(c) BuShips Conf. ltr. C-S19-7(341) of July 30, 1941.
(d) Cincpac Conf. ltr. S19/(50) Serial 01391 of September 8, 1941.
(e) BuShips Conf. ltr. C-S19-1-(1) (341)/C-EN28/A2-11 of August 29, 1941.
(f) Cincpac Conf. ltr. S19/(50) Serial 01593 of October 6, 1941.
1.A supplementary camouflage experimental program has been inaugurated, to validate conclusions summarized in reference (a), which were based upon the recent camouflage experiments, reference (b), and to evaluate certain new colors, described in reference (c), and new modes of painting.
2.In reference (c), the Bureau of Ships stated that manufacture of Formula 5-D is being discontinued, and that new Formulas 5-S (Sea Blue), 5-O (Ocean Gray) and 5-H (Haze Gray), now under manufacture, will supplant present colors, in the near future.
3.Experimental measures are now being applied, pursuant to reference (d), to ships listed:
(a) Measure 1A
(PORTER,
FLUSSER) - Apply Formula 5-S to all vertical and horizontal surfaces except decks.
Paint steel weather decks with bluish-gray deck paint, reference (e), when available.
(b) Measure 2A
(LAMSON) - Apply Measure 2 as shown on plate 2 of Ship Camouflage Instructions, Ships 2, using new Formulas 5-H, 5-O, and 5-S respectively, in place of old Formulas 5-L, 5-O and 5-D.
(c) Measure 12A
(MAHAN) - Apply the following composite style of camouflage painting:
(a) Hull to level of first continuous sheer (deck) line - Formula 5-S.
(b) Superstructure above line of Formula 5-S, and all masses, whether solid or "clustered", above the gun mount level -Formula 5-0.
(c) Pole masts and their yards and slender upper works above
(b) above Formula 5-H.
(d) Measure 1B
(DRAYTON) - Same as Measure 1A above, substituting experimental "Sapphire Blue" for Formula 5-S.
4.The ships listed in paragraph 3 above less PORTER will return to the Hawaiian Area in October. It is desired that all Force and Type Commanders have units under their commands make observations, consolidate and correlate reports as submitted, and forward them to the Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet prior to 15 December 1941, with recommendations in the premises.
5.In reference (f), Commander Battle Force and Commander Scouting Force were directed to have applied certain measures for suppression of "sun-glint" reflections from specular surfaces, and to have applied special blue-gray deck paint now under manufacture, to one ship of each type under their command, in each Task Force.
6.Upon designation of ships for any experimental measures, Force Commanders will disseminate information as to the identity of each ship and the measures applied, in order that all observers may compare intelligently the efficacy of the various schemes under trial.
7.Reports should furnish the following information :
(a) Comparative visibility by day, by night under natural illumination, and by night under artificial illumination, to surface, air, and periscope observers.
(b) Target angle deception.
(c) Range deception.
(d) Camouflage of type and ship identity.
(e) Effect of weather conditions.
(f) Effect of sun angle (Angle at the observer, between line to the sun and target).
(g) Revealing and/or identifying characteristics.
(h) Suggestions for improvement.
8.The attainment of optimum general camouflage is considered in large part dependent upon comprehensive service test; therefore, it is necessary that addressees utilize all available opportunities for observation of these tests. Reports submitted in accordance with paragraph 7 above will be of value only if they are the result of thorough study and preparation.
9.Pending receipt of comprehensive instructions from the Bureau of Ships, no change is contemplated in the present directive providing for the general application of Measure 1 to ships in the U. S. Pacific Fleet. However, inasmuch as the manufacture of Formula 5-D has been discontinued, painting will of necessity be limited to touching up with available supplies of this paint, until general issue of the new formulas, 5-S, 5-0 and 5-H has been initiated. Ships having exhausted supplies of formula 5-D, will requisition sufficient Formula 5-S, to apply Measure 1A of paragraph 2 above, and will report application of this measure to Type Commanders. For the present, paint will not be applied to the wood decks of ships other than those designated to carry out measures outlined in reference (f ). General instructions for painting all vessels in this Fleet will be promulgated in the near future.
H. E. KIMMEL.
DISTRIBUTION:
Cincpac 5CM-41
List II, Case 2; A, X2, X8,
EN3, EN7, ND11-14, ND11ac,
EN3; Office of Naval Operations, EN7; Bureau of Construction and Repair,
NY8-10, Cincaf A1.
Naval Shipyards: NY8; Puget Sound , NY9; Mare Island, NY9-1; Hunter's Point, NY10; Pearl Harbor
Cinclant 5CM-41
List I, Case 1; Type Comdrs.
P. C. CROSLEY,
Flag Secretary.
- 2 -
C-S19-7 (341)
C-S19-l-(l)
C-EN28/A2-11
S19-7 Camouflage
S19-1 Paint
EN28 = Bureau of Ships,
A2-11 = Departmental orders. NAVY DEPARTMENT
BUREAU OF SHIPS
WASHINGTON, D.C. September 20, 1941
CONFIDENTIAL
From: The Chief of the Bureau of Ships.
To: The Commandant, Navy Yard, Norfolk
The Commandant, Navy Yard, Mare Island (Via Air Mail)
The Commandant, Navy Yard, Cavite (Via Air Mail)
SUBJECT: Low Visibility Gray Paints - Change in Manufacturing Formula.
References:
(a) BuShips Conf. ltr. C-S19-7(341) dated July 30, 1941.
1. In amplification of reference (a), and in the absence of other conflicting instructions, it is requested that the paint manufacturing yards addressed substitute equal quantities of the new paints for the old paints in fulfillment of requisitions. The table of substitute colors is appended:
Substitute for Light Gray 5 or 5-L; "Haze Gray" (5-H), made from 5 gals. 5-U plus 2 pints 5-TM.
Substitute for Ocean Gray 5-0; "Ocean Gray" (5-0), made from 5 gals. 5-U plus 5 pints 5-TM.
Substitute for Dark Gray 5-D; "Sea Blue" (5-5), made from 5 gals. 5-U plus 10 pints 5-TM.
By Direction
Cincpac File No.
S19/(50)
Serial 01391 UNITED STATES PACIFIC,
FLEET PENNSYLVANIA, Flagship rbs
CONFIDENTIAL
Pearl Harbor, T. H. September 8, 1941. From: Commander-in-Chief, United States, Pacific Fleet
To : Commander Destroyers, Battle Force
Subject: Visibility of Ships - Experimental Painting.
Reference: (a) BuShips Conf. ltr. C-S19-7(3-4-DYr) of March 7, 1941
(b) BuShips Conf. ltr. C-S19-7(341) of July 30, 1941.
(c) Comdesron FIVE disp. 231725 of August 1941.
(d) Ship Camouflage Instructions (SHIPS-2).
(e) BuShips ltr. C-S19-1-(1)/C-S19-7(341) of August 8, 1941
(f) Comdesbatfor disp. 282145 of August 1941.
1.In reference (a), the Bureau of Ships stated that experimental tests in ship camouflage by Forces Afloat should be procsecuted vigorously. To this end, it is desired to proceed immediately with service tests of new paint colors, announced by the Bureau in reference (b), to expedite determination of their value.
2.It is therefore desired to apply each of the following measures to one of the ships in Destroyer Division NINE, plus Porter, which are scheduled to complete regular overhaul at Mare Island October 7, 1941:
Measure 1A - Apply Formula 5-S to all vertical surfaces, and to all horizontal surfaces except decks, to which gray deck paint should be applied.
Measure 2A - Apply Measure 2 or reference (d), as shown on plate 2, using new Formulas 5-H, 5-O, and 5-S respectively, in place of old Formulas 5-L, 5-O and 5-D.
Measure 12A- Apply the following composite style of camouflage painting:
(a) Hull to level of first continuous sheer (deck) line - Formula 5-S.
(b) Superstructure above line of Formula 5-S, and all masses, whether solid or "clustered", above the gun mount level - Formula 5-0.
(c) Pole masts and their yards and slender upper works above (b) above Formula 5-H.
Measure 1B - Same as Measure 1A above, substituting experimental "Sapphire Blue" for Formula 5-S, as prescribed in references (e) and (f).
3.Measures outlined in paragraph 2 above (except Measure 1C) are designed to demonstrate the validity of conclusions reached in the experiments conducted in accordance with reference (a). Instructions regarding observation and reports to be made will be the subject of separate correspondence.
Medhawk, it's always nice if you provide the URL from which you gathered those documents, both for source and copyright reasons.
In any case, those are the documents (some of them, anyway) upon which the argument for 5-S is made. They are all circumstantial, however - none of them explicitly say Arizona was painted 5-S by Dec. 7th. The documents merely suggest that it is a possibility.
These markings are for the battleship turret tops at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
The colors displayed on this page are as a visual reference only and are not color matched to actual Navy Paints!
Battleship Division One
Section One Section Two Section Three
Arizona Nevada Oklahoma
Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4
Red Red Red Red Red White Red Red True Blue
Battleship Division Two
Section One Section Two Section Three
Tennesee California Pennsylvania
Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4
White White Red White White White White White True Blue
Battleship Division Three
Section One Section Two Section Three
Idaho Mississippi?? New Mexico??
Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4
True Blue True Blue Red True Blue True Blue White True Blue True Blue True Blue
Battleship Division Four
Section One Section Two Section Three
West Virginia Colorado Maryland
Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4 Turret 1 Turret 2 Turret 4
Black Black Red Black Black White Black Black True Blue
Timmy C wrote:Medhawk, it's always nice if you provide the URL from which you gathered those documents, both for source and copyright reasons.
In any case, those are the documents (some of them, anyway) upon which the argument for 5-S is made. They are all circumstantial, however - none of them explicitly say Arizona was painted 5-S by Dec. 7th. The documents merely suggest that it is a possibility.
True the the Commander did put it out. And we all know how fast the US Navy is when it come to doing what there are order to do.
These are what I will take with me when I enter my Arizona in a model show
medhawk020 wrote:These are what I will take with me when I enter my Arizona in a model show
Any judge who would disqualify, discount or dimiss your model based on paint color (meaning 5S vs 5D) should be taken outside the show and beaten with a resin battleship hull.
Martin
"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne
MarkSchroeder wrote:Hello,
Someone posted on the other site. That the Arizona had 20mm Oerlikons installed during the attack. Is this true? The person states that he saw the info in the Profile Morskie 110: USS Arizona 1941 book.
Mark
The Profile Morskie book points to what they say are Oerlikons (unshielded, mind you) in three photos (all of which can be found on Navsource), one of which I find rather dubious but the other two... well, have a look: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013904b.jpg
Note what looks like a long, thin gun barrel pointing up from the foremast's MG platform (along with what might be a metal stop rail around it). Then in: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013910b.jpg
Note the two very similar guns pointing skyward in the birdbath on the maintop. In the third photo: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013900h.jpg
They point to the little thing right in the V between the tripod's back leg and some kind of splinter shield, claiming this it the remnant of an Oerlikon that was mounted on the funnel. Their arrow points to the little handlebar-looking thing. Maybe that's supposed to be the ring-and-bead sight?
So, with these observations spelled out... I'm not sure. They do look a lot more like Oerlikons, with their long barrels protruding well beyond the thicker recoil actions, than the shorter and stubbier .50 cal water-cooled guns. If those are the .50s in these photos, were they in the middle of cleaning them and left the rods stuck in the barrels? And yet, as others have stated, it seems anachronistic by the standards of common knowledge of the Arizona. Have a look. What do you guys make of this? (I've got no horse in this race; I'm building mine in an earlier fit anyway.)
The PM book has one cutting-edge and controversial new piece of information to add to our knowledge of what the Arizona looked like on the morning of December 7, but at the same time perpetuate the old unplanked engine covers mistake and don't pick up on the turret colors that are now widely known in ship circles. One bold step forward, two steps back...
medhawk020 wrote:These are what I will take with me when I enter my Arizona in a model show
Any judge who would disqualify, discount or dimiss your model based on paint color (meaning 5S vs 5D) should be taken outside the show and beaten with a resin battleship hull.
The IPMS here in the Great Northwest finds way to say things are wrong and Disqualify a person. I entered a OH-58D in a show In OR and the Judge told me it was painted wrong. It was US Army CARC Green that we touch up our Helicoptes with.
dsk wrote:Here we go with the color debate again. I believe it was Tracy or somebody who said she was light grey overall at least until June '41, then MS-1 (5-D) afterwards. Looking at the photos I'm convinced that she was 5-D at least through November 8th. The interview with Lauren Bruner (one of the miracle Arizona survivors) last December indicates that they started painting her in 5-S shortly before the day of the attack, but they never finished past getting the hull and main turrets painted. He also claimed that they had a hell of a time getting the lighter color to go on over the dark paint underneath without the latter showing through. Anybody who's ever painted a room in their house and tried to slap a light color over a darker one can understand that problem quite well. Of course it's just one more survivor's story, and naturally there are contradictions with what others have said, so we're still no closer to knowing for sure.
What the pictures reveal primarily is that the radar platform on the foremast went up at about the same time that the range clocks were removed, which I'm guessing was during the September drydock period briefly mentioned in Stillwell's book.
I would like to learn more about this interview with survivor Lauren Bruner. Granted its been 69 years since the event. Is this interview documented anywhere? I would very much like to read it and possibly use it as a reference. If this is credible, and one wanted to paint her on the day of infamy, Painting her in 5-S and then over painting her hull and turrets in F-S would make for an interesting subject. Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
The more I look at the pre- and post-attack photos, the more I'm convinced he was right. However, again that's just my own opinion, and I didn't try duplicating it with my model. Maybe I'll build another Arizona kit in the future and paint it that way.
I said earlier that I was going to paint my 1/200 Arizona 5-S, even if it wasn't accurate, but, the more this debate goes on I'm seriously considering painting it in Measure 1. This is the USS Arizona we are talking about, and that means it should be done right!
John
The problem with trying to make it the way Mr. Bruner said is that nobody knows how far they may have got with the 5-S (such as the casemates and splinter shields), or even if some amount of 5-O was involved. Therefore 5-D is the safe bet, but even then if you don't modify the kit you're talking about only September-October for sure (after the radar platform was added), with November-December being a huge "grey area" (pardon the pun) regarding the color.
By the way..... has Trumpeter released extra O2U Kingfishers for the kit yet?
MarkSchroeder wrote:Hello,
Someone posted on the other site. That the Arizona had 20mm Oerlikons installed during the attack. Is this true? The person states that he saw the info in the Profile Morskie 110: USS Arizona 1941 book.
Mark
The Profile Morskie book points to what they say are Oerlikons (unshielded, mind you) in three photos (all of which can be found on Navsource), one of which I find rather dubious but the other two... well, have a look: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013904b.jpg
Note what looks like a long, thin gun barrel pointing up from the foremast's MG platform (along with what might be a metal stop rail around it). Then in: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013910b.jpg
Note the two very similar guns pointing skyward in the birdbath on the maintop. In the third photo: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013900h.jpg
They point to the little thing right in the V between the tripod's back leg and some kind of splinter shield, claiming this it the remnant of an Oerlikon that was mounted on the funnel. Their arrow points to the little handlebar-looking thing. Maybe that's supposed to be the ring-and-bead sight?
So, with these observations spelled out... I'm not sure. They do look a lot more like Oerlikons, with their long barrels protruding well beyond the thicker recoil actions, than the shorter and stubbier .50 cal water-cooled guns. If those are the .50s in these photos, were they in the middle of cleaning them and left the rods stuck in the barrels? And yet, as others have stated, it seems anachronistic by the standards of common knowledge of the Arizona. Have a look. What do you guys make of this? (I've got no horse in this race; I'm building mine in an earlier fit anyway.)
The PM book has one cutting-edge and controversial new piece of information to add to our knowledge of what the Arizona looked like on the morning of December 7, but at the same time perpetuate the old unplanked engine covers mistake and don't pick up on the turret colors that are now widely known in ship circles. One bold step forward, two steps back...
- Sean F.
These pictures are great, but they sure open up some questions. Could the Machine Guns have been changed out during the October dry-dock? How much mod would it have required to go from belt-fed, water-cooled, to clip-fed, air-cooled. I would imagine all the ammo containers would have been changed, and the waterlines removed. Maybe an aerial photo from October to December 7 will show up with the gun tub in all its glory. Since the Pennsy was in dry-dock on Dec 7, are there any pictures showing her gun tub atop the Main Mast? Or any of the other machine gun positions? I would think they would take the similar opportunity to convert her also if it was a simple enough conversion.
The never-ending search for facts continues unabated.
dsk wrote:The problem with trying to make it the way Mr. Bruner said is that nobody knows how far they may have got with the 5-S (such as the casemates and splinter shields), or even if some amount of 5-O was involved. Therefore 5-D is the safe bet, but even then if you don't modify the kit you're talking about only September-October for sure (after the radar platform was added), with November-December being a huge "grey area" (pardon the pun) regarding the color.
By the way..... has Trumpeter released extra O2U Kingfishers for the kit yet?
I guess from my way of thinking we have a witness who was there who described the painting of the ship in transition. It wasn't completely 5-D or 5-S. It was a combination. He recalls that the hull and turrets were completed. He has no recollection of the other areas. Not only that but its been 70 years since the event. We believe we know most of the rest. I think it makes an interesting conversation piece to paint it this way if you're trying to model her as she appeared on Dec 7th. There's enough missing information that some artistic license can be used in the painting process to help depict a painting project in transition. The interview is certainly good reference material to present against the model.
If 100% accuracy of color on December 7th is the goal, I would suggest that based on the evidence that the painting was in transition, this will not be possible. The best references available to make an accurate model are of the light grey paint measure when many photos of the Arizona were taken and published. The next best option it seems would be 5-D. A complete 5-S model appears to be incorrect and would depict what she would have looked like had they finished the repaint.
Again, my opinion only. Everyone should make it their own.
Dave
I noticed this little detail a few months ago and thought that I would bring this up for discussion. Right under the bullwarks/splinter sheid that wraps around the conning tower and dirctly behind turret 2, there is some kind of protrusion that is about two feet below the conning tower deck and protrudes out about the same distance out as the splinter sheid above. I beleive that this is some sort of addition that was added but when I don't know. I had thought that maybe the deck had dropped down due to damage from the explosion but the gussets or braces of some type above it that support the splintersheilds around the conning tower leave myself guessing otherwise. I also noticed that it is also shown on the drawing of the wreck on page 262 of Stillwell's book. I'll post two pics, the first from Navsource and the second is an enlargement of the area scanned from Stillwell's book. I would like to hear your thoughts.
I see in Stillwells book on page 160 where the funnel cables start, does anyone have a photo(s) where they go?
I'm still a great fan of the Trumpeter kit but if you want a completely accurate Arizona, it would take you years of research and mods to the kit to get it right. I'd love for all of us to post what we have found...Not to slam the model...Just to give everyone a heads-up.
Every model I've made is loaded with compromises. But as long as I'm happy with the results...Nothing else really matters...
My observations will be posted here soon. Stay tuned. Please contribute. Thanks!
I believe it was Tracy or somebody who said she was light grey overall at least until June '41, then MS-1 (5-D) afterwards. Looking at the photos I'm convinced that she was 5-D at least through November 8th. The interview with Lauren Bruner (one of the miracle Arizona survivors) last December indicates that they started painting her in 5-S shortly before the day of the attack, but they never finished past getting the hull and main turrets painted. He also claimed that they had a hell of a time getting the lighter color to go on over the dark paint underneath without the latter showing through. Anybody who's ever painted a room in their house and tried to slap a light color over a darker one can understand that problem quite well. Of course it's just one more survivor's story, and naturally there are contradictions with what others have said, so we're still no closer to knowing for sure.
