At 'Em Arizona Fans!

[SeanF]

Regarding Tracy's photo of the foremast MG platform: the one on the right (ship's port side) does look like it has the offset arm typical of a water-cooled .50 mount. The one on the left (ship's starboard) is too blurry for me to tell anything. But the wire-frame guard rail above both mounts can be seen. That'll be an interesting detail to add to an Arizona build! But back to the gun: maybe what looked like a long, thin barrel extension in the photo I posted is an optical illusion, some rod or pipe (maybe part of the guardrail) that happens to be in-line with the .50 cal from the photo angle. Or we could be seeing something else entirely and not a gun at all? Given that the one visible in the photo I posted was the starboard one, could there have been a mis-matched set of one .50 and one 20mm on Dec. 7? (I seriously doubt that, but just throwing it out there as a possible explanation)

Regarding Tracy's photo of the birdbath: This is a great shot for seeing how the mast was mounted on the back of the tub! Flipping through the photos on Navsource again, it seems as though whatever guns were up there were either removed or lowered sometime between Dec. 7 and 12. Three identical, apparently long barrelled guns can be seen in some of the clearer Dec. 7 shots (fore, aft, and port corners; the starboard corner is never clearly visible in the shots I've seen); but photos from days later show none. Of course, all these shots are from below, so the gun tub's side is obscuring the view. My gut tells me no, too, but I'm trying to come up with some explanation for what I'm seeing. Where might information be found about the acceptance date and initial distribution of Oerlikons?

Regarding Tracy's comments on the photo posted by leftie: That shot can be seen on Navsource in the Pennsylvania 1930-1940 gallery. Something I noticed about this shot is that at the bottom right corner, you can see the top of the armored conning tower. It is also dark, seemingly the same as the turret top, and also has a Standard Gray perimeter. See also:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013852.jpg
Now, note that the superstructure decks are also dark - this I believe to be linoleum; in the black-and-white photo, it looks the same as the turret top, which we know to be red paint and not linoleum. Back to the conn: there is a railing around the top, which happens to be inset from the edge about the same as the gray perimeter. So: red-painted conn, or a linoleum patch? Either way, I don't recall seeing this on any other US battleship of the time.

- Sean F.

[BFR4570]

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).

After looking at a couple of scans I grabbed at San Francisco NARA I'm reasonably certain the forward AA guns were .50 cal and not 20mms. Nothing definitive on the aft fighting top, but my gut says no. Note the extra pole on the tub though....

Looking at the tub, on the port corner near the bottom, it looks to be some kind of pipe or post sticking out. Maybe this looked like a 20mm when viewed from further underneath the tub? Just a possibility. Also, I notice under the tub on the fore and port points are a couple of pipes with a 90 deg joint that then goes up into the tub at just about where the guns were mounted. Might these be the pipes that supplied the water to cool the MGs at these locations?

[SeanF]

Looking at the tub, on the port corner near the bottom, it looks to be some kind of pipe or post sticking out. Maybe this looked like a 20mm when viewed from further underneath the tub? Just a possibility. Also, I notice under the tub on the fore and port points are a couple of pipes with a 90 deg joint that then goes up into the tub at just about where the guns were mounted. Might these be the pipes that supplied the water to cool the MGs at these locations?

I think they're just additional yardarms. See:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013913b.jpg
and also:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013940b.jpg

- Sean F.

[BFR4570]

Looking at the tub, on the port corner near the bottom, it looks to be some kind of pipe or post sticking out. Maybe this looked like a 20mm when viewed from further underneath the tub? Just a possibility. Also, I notice under the tub on the fore and port points are a couple of pipes with a 90 deg joint that then goes up into the tub at just about where the guns were mounted. Might these be the pipes that supplied the water to cool the MGs at these locations?

I think they're just additional yardarms. See:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013913b.jpg
and also:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013940b.jpg

- Sean F.

You are right. Also, I noticed that in your first picture, on Dec 9, that there is no sign of the MGs. Yet in the second picture, on Dec 7, also taken from near water level, two of the MGs are easily seen. It looks like they had already removed the MGs by the 9th of Dec. No doubt to put them somewhere useful should the Japanese return for an encore.

[D-Boy]

Real quick who is making the wood deck kits and for how much? Thanks guys!

KA Models out of Seoul, Korea.

Deck and PE set all-in-one: http://www.ka-models.com/index.php?rout ... uct_id=296

~$200 US.

Several threads here discuss and evaluate:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=76227

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=74167

[leftie]

Just a few observations...Everyone seems to have missed that the rear crane doesn't have center braces in the ovals of the crane. And what's with this third tie-down thing-a-ma-jig?

[JCRAY]

I would encourage you to look at Pennsylvania on Navsource. hth

[Leftie]

Jcray,

Thanks for the advice but I was trying to point out the errors of the Trumpeter 1/200 Arizona kit. And how many of the PE aftermarket makers got it wrong.

The Trumpeter kit is a fantastic kit but as I'm finding out now, if you want a 99% accurate model, you'll be modifying this kit for a long, long time. I'm looking forward to how the builders of this kit choose what needs to be corrected and what is okay/ too much trouble to correct.

Thanks for your response.

[Bondoman]

This last weekend I was down cleaning out my father in laws house and I found the little "The Pearl Harbor Story" which he must have picked up on a convention trip in the '60s. Fun to sit and read through, and I'm adding it to my Arizona collection. Signed by Rice, they must have been numerous as they are on eBay for $ 10 - $20. it does have some pictures I had not seen before, including a great one of "Vals" ("Zeroes" according to the book), passing one of the B-17s, taken from the observers position.

[JCRAY]

Hi Leftie I just think it's easier to see the details in photos of Penn on NavSource than the CriticalPast screen shots of Ariz. hth

[BFR4570]

Jcray,

Thanks for the advice but I was trying to point out the errors of the Trumpeter 1/200 Arizona kit. And how many of the PE aftermarket makers got it wrong.

The Trumpeter kit is a fantastic kit but as I'm finding out now, if you want a 99% accurate model, you'll be modifying this kit for a long, long time. I'm looking forward to how the builders of this kit choose what needs to be corrected and what is okay/ too much trouble to correct.

Thanks for your response.

The problem with trying to reproduce these braces in the rear crane is, to me anyway, how small they are. They appear to be about the same thickness as the railing cable. So that would be what, maybe an inch at the most? On the 1/200 Arizona, that would be a piece of PE approximately .005". That is what, about the thickness of a thick human hair? I have seen some PE that looked about this small, but it looked really fragile too. The other problem would be, how is it mounted? Is it on the starboard side? Port side? Right in the middle? What is each end mounted to? This picture doesn't show much. Anybody have a scale drawing of this crane showing these braces? The PE makers probably never saw a picture that showed these, or a set of plans showing them either, would be my guess as to why none of them have these. But that is just my guess, and it wouldn't be the first time, or the last, that I have guessed wrong.

[davidwaples]

Leftie: interesting photo. Private collection or from a book?

I got unsubscribed from this thread for a bit, so I'm coming in late to the discussion on a couple of points.

Let me just say that there is no proof at this point of any particular scheme or paint color on December 7th. I'm working on putting together a trip to see if I can solve that this fall.... but there are no guarantees. If you are not comfortable paintig it the way you want at this point you have three options:
1) prewar gray
2) Measure 1
3) wait

We know she was in the first two at least, it's December 7th we need to figure out. All my research has really done is muddy the waters, but leave the possibility of something other than straight Measure 1 very possible. Anyone who says otherwise really doesn't know what they're talking about, and I'd be more than happy to illustrate this point with references if they want to say otherwise.

20mms though... intriguing. Off to look at some of my wreckage photos....

Hi Tracy,
It seems you are discounting our survivors recollection that the hull and turrets were painted 5-S with the balance not certain but in the known Measure 1 scheme? Do you have a reason for discounting this? I hope you're able to discover something in your research.
Dave

Dave

[MartinJQuinn]

For the discussion of what was in the birdbath.

[Bondoman]

I cannot see the connection.

[BFR4570]

OK, I'll bite! In Martin's pictures, what are they? Were the water-cooled .50s really that long? Or is this an optical illusion? The thick part looks to be too solid to be the recoil spring of a 20mm, but what the heck is sticking out of the barrels? Were they being serviced? I don't remember hearing of any of them getting into action. The order to abandon ship came pretty quick.

[Bondoman]

I like the theory. Maybe the wrecking crews stuck a staff or a flag into the 50s to indicate they were reusable.
EDIT The more I look at the photos, the more I think those are Brownings with a stick in the muzzle. There's a bit of a bulge at the muzzle, just like in the pic above.

In any case, I do not think those were 20mm cannons.

And the Japanese did attack again of course, although at about 10,000 feet and at night so the .50s were not useful.

Doris (Dorie) Miller, Navy Cross and d.1943; operated a Browning during the attack.
Cuba Gooding in the lousy movie.

The initial orders were to go below the armored deck.

[denstore]

For the discussion of what was in the birdbath.

It looks more like wires with some kind of insulation in the ends.

[Steve Sobieralski]

Perhaps these were rods attached to the barrels to prevent the guns from being depressed below the tops of the birdbath bulwark. Since the guns were mounted so high, it is conceivable that a gunner could find himself shooting down on an airplane and, in the excitment of combat, shooting through the bulwark.

[Bullet175]

Perhaps these were rods attached to the barrels to prevent the guns from being depressed below the tops of the birdbath bulwark. Since the guns were mounted so high, it is conceivable that a gunner could find himself shooting down on an airplane and, in the excitment of combat, shooting through the bulwark.

Agreed, These rods to me dont look like they are down the bores of the guns. They look like they are mounted to the bottom of the water jackets. Offset. A simple device to limit travel (up-down side to side) or alert the gunner to a dangerous angle sounds like a good possibility.

[dsk]

I also agree, given the dangers of sweeping the other gunners in the birdbath with your own muzzle.

And the Japanese did attack again of course, although at about 10,000 feet and at night so the .50s were not useful.

Huh? The Japanese bombers that dropped the fatal bomb were at 10,000 feet, and I'm sure the .50 cal gunners tried to hit them, but of course in vain. But it certainly wasn't at night!