I can't give you a full explanation for why these Antenna Trunks are designed this way, but the purpose is to be the connection between the wire antennas and the feed from the radio amplifiers. The center of the trunk is an insulator and I'm not sure why the rest of the "cone" structure is made in this way but assume it has to due to the high power involved. Here is a close-up view of the Trunks. The wire to the middle goes to the antenna and the other heavier cables attached to the feed housing appear to be a tension/relief for the antenna wires.
I have a bit of new information about how the O'Bannon was painted before she left for the Pacific. On my last trip to NARA I went through the BuShips files for Nicholas, O'Bannon, and Chevalier looking for information on directors used on these three quad 1.1-in. mount equipped ships. I didn't find much in that area, except that Chevalier did get a Mk 51 director for her mount in October 1942 before she went to North Africa. Her sisters left the yard without any directors.
In going through the departure reports for Nicholas and O'Bannon from Boston Navy Yard in August 1942 I found this reference to a repainting job order for the O'Bannon. There was no definition of what measure was used nor a description of what paints were used. I didn't find a similar job order for the Nicholas in her departure report. Nicholas finished her availability on 15 August 1942 and O'Bannon finished her availability about 25-29 August 1942. There are photos of Nicholas on 15 August 1942 showing that she had been repainted into Ms 18. Since O'Bannon was repainted around 25 August 1942 to the "latest specifications", it is likely she was repainted to one of the NEW camo schemes called out in the new regulations. It would seem that it was very unlikely that the O'Bannon went to the Pacific in Ms 12 mod. I don't have a clue if she was repainted to Ms 18, 21, 22, or something else on the new authorized schemes.
I can't give you a full explanation for why these Antenna Trunks are designed this way, but the purpose is to be the connection between the wire antennas and the feed from the radio amplifiers. The center of the trunk is an insulator and I'm not sure why the rest of the "cone" structure is made in this way but assume it has to due to the high power involved. Here is a close-up view of the Trunks. The wire to the middle goes to the antenna and the other heavier cables attached to the feed housing appear to be a tension/relief for the antenna wires.
The actual antenna is stretched between insulators which are part of the assembly mounted to the feed housing, the power lead goes from the trunk to the actual antenna wire, otherwise the antenna would be grounded to th ship. Trunks were made like this to prevent arcing between the signal lead and the ground of the ship, being salt water environment the trunks have a bit more safety factor than equivalent land based units would. There is some serious power involved with radio transmitters it can literally blow your arm off.
How do I get the pen to write here? Now my screen's all smeared with ink.........
Rick E Davis wrote:I have a bit of new information about how the O'Bannon was painted before she left for the Pacific. On my last trip to NARA I went through the BuShips files for Nicholas, O'Bannon, and Chevalier looking for information on directors used on these three quad 1.1-in. mount equipped ships. I didn't find much in that area, except that Chevalier did get a Mk 51 director for her mount in October 1942 before she went to North Africa. Her sisters left the yard without any directors.
In going through the departure reports for Nicholas and O'Bannon from Boston Navy Yard in August 1942 I found this reference to a repainting job order for the O'Bannon. There was no definition of what measure was used nor a description of what paints were used. I didn't find a similar job order for the Nicholas in her departure report. Nicholas finished her availability on 15 August 1942 and O'Bannon finished her availability about 25-29 August 1942. There are photos of Nicholas on 15 August 1942 showing that she had been repainted into Ms 18. Since O'Bannon was repainted around 25 August 1942 to the "latest specifications", it is likely she was repainted to one of the NEW camo schemes called out in the new regulations. It would seem that it was very unlikely that the O'Bannon went to the Pacific in Ms 12 mod. I don't have a clue if she was repainted to Ms 18, 21, 22, or something else on the new authorized schemes.
Photos from her damage report for the 8" shell fragment hit of 11/13/1942 she appears to be Ms-21.
How do I get the pen to write here? Now my screen's all smeared with ink.........
Thanks for the clearer description of the antenna/trunk/feed housing assembly. I'm familiar with ground-based high power radio antenna trunks/insulators. These ship-based installations are different in design likely for the reasons you mention. I did a bad job of explaining it.
I remember that you had found the O'Bannon damage report photos that confirmed that she was repainted to Ms 21 by 13 November 1942. For me it was uncertain what scheme O'Bannon and Fletcher were painted in as they arrived in the Pacific war zones. I suspect from this work order note, that O'Bannon was repainted like her sister Nicholas only a couple of weeks earlier. But, without some document describing exactly what she painted to or a "lost" photo surfacing ... we may never know for sure.
Thanks for the clearer description of the antenna/trunk/feed housing assembly. I'm familiar with ground-based high power radio antenna trunks/insulators. These ship-based installations are different in design likely for the reasons you mention. I did a bad job of explaining it.
It's really just a scaled up version of old school land based systems for the salt water environment Rick. I sure wouldn't want to be anywhere near them when the transmitters were fired up.
I remember that you had found the O'Bannon damage report photos that confirmed that she was repainted to Ms 21 by 13 November 1942. For me it was uncertain what scheme O'Bannon and Fletcher were painted in as they arrived in the Pacific war zones. I suspect from this work order note, that O'Bannon was repainted like her sister Nicholas only a couple of weeks earlier. But, without some document describing exactly what she painted to or a "lost" photo surfacing ... we may never know for sure.
They're mostly details of the damage to the right door of torp. mount #1 but you can see a bit of the tubes and part of her bridge in a few and she looks Ms-21, best we have so far. What she went to the Pacific in I have no idea. They could have repainted at 5 possible places, their home east coast yard, either end of the Panama Canal (there was usually a short wait at both ends for ships to clear the canal or the rest of a given group to finish transiting but it could be a few days at either or both ends), a west coast yard or Pearl. It might be worth hitting the Canal Zone general photo series and the Canal Zone base/yard/dock series, you never know what weird stuff will be in the canal.
How do I get the pen to write here? Now my screen's all smeared with ink.........
Every so often someone asks about the difference between a "Double Knuckle" and a "Single Knuckle" 5-in/38-cal gun housing. While at NARA last week I found this photo of Abbot (DD-629) at Pearl Harbor on 20 October 1943 after a "minor" fender-bender. The lighting was just right to illustrate the difference between the two mounts. As you can see there isn't much difference and in most small scales, it isn't even noticeable. These are the later welded constructed housings.
I've tried to look back through this thread to answer this question but my attention span is in the 2 year old child neighborhood tonight. I am planning on starting the Tamiya 1/350 Fletcher kit very soon, and was wondering if the kit out of the box is correct armament wise for when she was painted in the Ms 12mod scheme (I thought I would give a camo job a try and have ordered a set of Gators masks for this build). I think I read that she went to the Pacific with a twin 40 instead of the 1.1mm and I know that additional 20's were added to all of these early Fletchers. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Quick response, Fletcher when commissioned had a single twin 40-mm mount (as far as I know and for sure at time of delivery ... she NEVER had a quad 1.1-in mount installed) between 53 and 54 mounts and was painted in Ms 12R. Fletcher can be built out of the box to this configuration. Fletcher received the fantail twin 40-mm mount and "likely", but not known for sure, was repainted to either Ms 18, 22, or 21 in late August before heading to the Pacific. Likely, but again not certain, Fletcher was repainted in Ms 21 in early November 1942 ... certainly was by January 1943. Fletcher had six 20-mm guns from commissioning until sometime in the Pacific before January 1943 when she got an additional 20-mm atop the pilothouse.
Thanks Rick. Just what I was looking for. Although its kind of ironic that she never saw action in the Ms 12 camo scheme which you see her built in so often.
Can you guys please help me selecting "proper" Fletcher class DDs? For my USS San Francisco CA-38 (as in late 44, after 16 oct 44 refit) diorama at port (either Pearl or Mare Island), I need two Fletcher class destroyers to portray on the opposite side of the pier. I thought of making a round-bridge one from Tamiya kit with GMM parts + modifying to late 44 AA fit depending on the particular ship, and a square bridge one from Trumpeter's The Sullivans kit with L'Arsenal upgrade set.
Any suggestions?
I would prefer using different paint schemes if possible...
Model kit manufacturer and distributor: https://b2b.modellbaudienst.de
Distributor of Very Fire, Snowman, Milania Master Korabel, Falkonet, Microdisign in EU
1:350 HMS Diana 1794 - nearly released
Further kits in preparation.
Im talking about 1/350 scale, dio size is planned to be 30x70 cm (my showcase shelf). Shall be a pier with San Francisco and some smaller ship (subchaser, lighter or similar sized, depends on what I can get) on one side, and both DDs on the other.
Model kit manufacturer and distributor: https://b2b.modellbaudienst.de
Distributor of Very Fire, Snowman, Milania Master Korabel, Falkonet, Microdisign in EU
1:350 HMS Diana 1794 - nearly released
Further kits in preparation.
Well at 1/350 scale, the only kits are Tamiya and Trumpeter, along with various resin kits (not sure which are in production and who owns them now). Depending on how accurate you wish your diorama to be ... aka ships that actually were in the same location ... the choices of ships to model will determine how much modifications you may need to do. The Tamiya Fletcher kit represents her very early configuration and would not be representative of any Fletchers by October 1944. A fair amount of work will be required to make her look like a mid-war round bridge unit with five twin 40-mm mounts and seven 20-mm guns UNLESS you kit bash with a Trumpeter Fletcher kit. If you got two Trumpeter kits and one Tamiya kit, there should be enough parts for two representative ships ... one round-bridge and one open square-bridge. I won't get into the pros and cons for these kits ... they both have problems ... and depending on which ships you choose, the modifications to the kit or bashed kits, required to be accurate for that ship varies.
Here are some examples of Fletchers in overhaul in September-October 1944 that may make good candidates for you.
For round-bridge units: Charles Ausburne (DD-570) and Dyson (DD-572) were finishing overhauls in late September 1944 and I'm not sure but may have still been there on say 1 October. The great part about these two is that there are many photos available of them since they were overhauled at Mare Island and they had the shape of tub used for the twin 40-mm mount between 53 and 54 mounts. There were others overhauled in the San Francisco bay area with varying degrees of photo coverage that could have made a stop at Mare Island for some getting some specific work done, getting ammo, etc. Saufley (DD-465), Waller (DD-466), Pringle (DD-477), Stanly (DD-478), Converse (DD-509), and Eaton (DD-510), among several others.
As for open square-bridge units: it is a little tricker, because I found fewer of them getting overhauls in this period without spending time looking though all 117 of them. I did find that Norman Scott (DD-690) was finishing her repairs/overhaul at Mare Island in October 1944 and has several photos available. If Navsource images are not good enough, I have scanned several views of Norman Scott at NARA and can either post them or send them to you. Also, it appears that Kimberly (DD-521) and Bullard (DD-660) were in overhaul at the time, but with poor photographic coverage. Likely because their overhauls were farmed out to a private yard in the San Francisco area. There should be others, I'm just not sure which ones they are without a long search. Many ships would make stops in the San Francisco area for minor work or while doing shakedown on their way to the Pacific war zones, so there were likely MANY others possible. Without checking San Francisco's War Diary to see which ships were near her at Mare Island and when ... it would be hard to be absolutely sure.
Of course you can cruise through the Destroyer section of Navsource.org and see if any other Fletchers with Mare Island photos were in that period.
That is enormous help for me! Really huge thanks!
I think the most likely combination for me would be Dyson and Norman Scott. They both are well covered photographically, and important to me, these had MS31/16d and MS32/13d respectively. If you could get me the extra photos, I would be extremely happy to see them! The main problem is that Navsource has only starboard-side photo for Dyson's camo, but I would need to check the photos of other 31/16d painted Fletchers (plenty of these luckily) if I can get a port-side camo scheme... I am also somehow tempted by the Kimberly, as her camo scheme is an exact copy of the San Francisco one
As for kits, I'll wait until the GMM and L'Arsenal PE sets would arrive, and then decide whether I would get another Trumpeter kit to kitbash, or whether I could scratch the platforms, and get the aftermarket weapons.. At least, it looks now that L'Arsenal upgrade set provides new turrets in resin with both resin and brass barrels, so the Tamiya ship could just use Trumpeter turrets with resin barrels or so.. I think I have enough parts to upgrade the 40mm guns as well, or could just get the L'Arsenal ones. I have a bit of time until I could start them anyways, as I need to build a liberty ship to finish my diorama project for the 28feb-1march exhibition, and also want to finish San Francisco first.
Model kit manufacturer and distributor: https://b2b.modellbaudienst.de
Distributor of Very Fire, Snowman, Milania Master Korabel, Falkonet, Microdisign in EU
1:350 HMS Diana 1794 - nearly released
Further kits in preparation.
Gentlemen- In researching appropriate early-war Fletcher class ships to model I was attracted to DD 448, USS LaVallette. In Alan Raven's Fletcher-Class Destroyers there, is a picture on page 73 of DD 448. In it she appears to have her hull painted in Measure 12 Mod., with her superstructure and guns in possibly Measure 22{presumably on the way to a complete change to Measure 22}. It also shows the addition of a twin 40mm on the stern, and a reduction of the side 20mm's to a single gun. Am I correct in my assumptions, and are there any other changes made during the August 1942 refit? Thanks for your assistance.
Yes that is correct. When the fantail twin 40-mm mount was authorized, the number of 20-mm guns were reduced to four as you can see. This didn't last long and the numbers grew to about eight 20-mm guns on the round-faced bridged Fletchers so configured by early 1943 (~Feb 43). The early September view of La Vallette shows her running trials before her modifications were done. Note that she lacks her Mk 51 directors (actually she has the foundations for the Mk 49 director, but they were unavailable). And yes she was in the process of being repainted into Ms 22. The following image shows her after her refit was done and just before she went to the North Africa Invasion. There were three Fletchers with this basic configuration with the original high round tub intended for the quad 1.1-in mount: La Vallette as shown with a fifth 20-mm added in December 1942 on an elevated platform before the bridge and unknown additions in the Pacific, Fletcher retained six 20-mm guns before getting a seven added atop the pilothouse in the Pacific, and Jenkins, she also went to North Africa and had seven 20-mm guns in December 1942 and an eighth 20-mm gun added atop her pilothouse in the Pacific. La Vallette was not in the Pacific war zone for long before she received war damage and returned for repairs. By the time she was repaired, she was updated to the five twin 40-mm configuration ... completely skipping the three twin 40-mm configuration.
I've got a few Fletcher Class Destroyer questions for the experts around here :
I am in the process of doing my research for my Revell 1/144 Fletcher. The sheer size of the kit will require details on the hull that i am currently lacking in my knowledge base.
1. I have seen several photos of a fletcher out of water:
a. Have seen about 20 squares attached to the lower hull just above the prop shafts. Are these the "Zincs"?
b. Does anyone have any photos (or can point to a reference) of the lower hull water intake "pipes"? These are large enough to beg for inclusion in 144 scale. The ONLY intake I have actually seen was on starboard side, midships and it was large and went straight up into the hull. The ones on the USS Kidd DD-661 in Baton Rogue are capped, so can't see what they look like, but they give a fairly good reference to location and general size, except for the very belly of the beast.
c. Drydock photos of the hull seem to be rather rare.
d. I am assuming (hate to do that) that most of the above waterline discharges are the constant running head/galley discharges. Is that correct? Most seem to be located in berthing areas. What about condenser / boiler discharges? I have seen in plans a "Scuttle" in forward hull near keel, are there more? Any idea what they look like? Are any of these "Openings" screened?
There is a lot going on beneath the waterline. It will be interesting to see what kind of answers this generates.
: