Calling all USS Enterprise CV-6 fans

[JTninja]

A preview of the new snap-fit 1/700 Meng Enterprise CV-6

https://www.themodellingnews.com/2020/0 ... e-uss.html

[Thomas E. Johnson]

A preview of the new snap-fit 1/700 Meng Enterprise CV-6

https://www.themodellingnews.com/2020/0 ... e-uss.html

This looks to be even better than the Trumpeter 1/700 kit.

[Richard Durham]

Built the 1/700 Trumpeter Enterprise. The weapons fit is for the Battle of Santa Cruz (I think). I thought the flight deck detail was great, but the kit fit up was a challenge and I replaced just about all the weapons. Got some good advice on painting from this thread.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

Built the 1/700 Trumpeter Enterprise. The weapons fit is for the Battle of Santa Cruz (I think). I thought the flight deck detail was great, but the kit fit up was a challenge and I replaced just about all the weapons. Got some good advice on painting from this thread.

I like how vibrant your water looks.

[John W.]

Yorktown and Essex class carriers had armored hangar decks.

Not actually.
The YORKTOWNs were "treaty" carriers in the sense they were greatly affected by London Treaty tonnage limits even though those limits had been rescinded before the ships were commissioned. The point being that YORKTOWN and ENTERPRISE were limited in size by the remaining tonnage allocated to the USN for aircraft carriers. Since HORNET was a "YORKTOWN repeat", ditto - not much could be changed in her design when she was ordered so as to bridge the gap until ESSEX could be designed and built. Even ESSEX was an outgrowth of YORKTOWN and affected by some of the same limits and designers' experiences. She was not a clean sheet of paper.

The YORKTOWNs did not have armored hangar decks. The armored deck was the fourth deck and was fabricated of 60# Specially Treated Steel (STS). The main / hangar deck was less than 20# non-STS in the drawings I have (MD Silver USN blueprints). The fourth deck is at the same height above the keel as the top of the vertical exterior side belt armor visible in photos, and is attached to it there. The fourth deck STS segment is essentially the same length as the side armor belt. With fore and aft 60#STS transverse bulkheads at the extreme ends of the side armor belts, this structure made up the armored citadel 'box' protecting most of the ship's vitals from getting wet from damage and to keep her mobile. To repeat, the main deck was not part of this armored box, the top of which was three decks below the main deck. The vertical side belts also provided protection from torpedo and 6" gunfire. With some design paring here and there to meet weight limits, this armor design was not seen as robust, especially when the ship was heavily loaded or in heavy seas when the top of the belt was a bit underwater. It was seen as the best that could be done under the given limits.

When the ESSEX design was begun, she was largely an up-sized YORKTOWN to get the ship designed, built, and launched as quickly as possible with the war on. The original armored citadel pretty much resembled that of CV-5. As the General Board began to have concerns about the armor for the CV-9 class, they looked at two additional options - the armored flight deck (AFD) similar to U.K. practice, and an armored main (hangar) deck. Without dragging this out, the weight penalty and the high center of gravity for the AFD led that option to be rejected for CV-9 class. A variant of AMD was chosen in addition to the pre-existing design of an armored box with the armor deck again being the fourth deck. It was not possible due to weight considerations to extend the side belt armor up to the main deck level, so the top of the citadel remained at the fourth deck level as can be seen in photos and drawings of the class. It was fully understood that this configuration with an armored main deck could mainly be expected to provide protection from aerial bombs - low trajectory shellfire could penetrate the hull sides through the thin shell plating below the main deck and the above the armored deck. It was a compromise, which added to, but did not replace the original citadel design. The armored main deck, even at 2 1/2" of STS would still not resist penetration of a 500# or greater armor piercing (AP) bomb. Despite the projected shortcomings, no ESSEX class CVs were lost in the war. The two YORKTOWNs which were sunk took far more damage to sink than had been expected for that matter. In combat, enemy attacks on HORNET resulted in her being struck by four bombs, three torpedoes, and two suicide aircraft crashes without sinking, though left immobile in a slowly flooding condition. Several more torpedoes fired by USN warships failed to sink her prior to the arrival of Japanese forces who fired several more torpedoes which finally sank her.

Information sources for those interested: "U.S. Aircraft Carriers - An Illustrated Design History", Norman Freidman; "USS HORNET - Warship's Battle Damage 1", Robert Summerall; "The Aircraft Carrier INTREPID", John Roberts; "USS HORNET (CV-8) - A Study in Blueprints", Maryland Silver Company (Duane Borchers,Sr.).

[ModelMonkey]

Thanks, John.

Post corrected.

[Brocky]

This has been discussed before. There is pretty good evidence that the pre-WWII carriers painted their hangar bulkheads with Aluminum paint. After major modifications, it is quite possible that the bulkheads were painted white. Here is an image of USS ENTERPRISE's hangar dated 25 December 1942. Note the shinning bulkheads to the left. Pre-WWII images also show really bright shinny bulkheads.

Thanks Rick. I am learning a lot from this site.
When looking at the following picture, am I right in thinking that the angled wall on the left is the boiler room uptake trunking on the starboard side of the hanger deck under the island? I also get the feeling that the bright area on the left between the audience and the uptakes (the one with the door and ladders) as well as the deck and bracing above the uptakes are white when comparing the brightness to the sailor wearing summer whites and the one wearing a lab coat in the center. Hmm maybe it's a hodge podge in the hanger deck... Interesting...

And by the look of the 5ft deep shine on the deck in this picture, maybe I should use a semi gloss coat on the hanger deck after painting dark gray.

Thanks again and wishing everyone a great year in 2021.

[Brocky]

One question I have is what was the underside of the exposed flight deck at the bow and stern painted? Deck blue? Or being that it was wood and not observable from the air was it painted at all?...

It is a common misunderstanding that the American carrier flight decks were structurally made of wood. American carrier flight decks were made of steel. The top of the steel flight deck was covered with a layer of wood planking as a wearing surface. In other words, the flight deck was steel with a wood skin.

Thanks Steve.

So the underside of the flight deck on top of the support girders at the bow and stern would be light gray on a 1936 to 1939 or so CV-5 and CV-6 and then in whatever the paint scheme called for that was being used after that?

Thanks again Mark B.

[ModelMonkey]

Hi Mark,

I'm not able to answer the color question definitively other than to say that photos indicate it was not blue, at least not a dark color like 5N. Tracy White probably has some documentation for the wartime color of overheads visible from outside the ship. He may have some pre-war documentation, too.

The pre-war photo below taken of sistership Hornet CV-8 in November, 1941, may be helpful. To my eye, the overheads all look to be painted the same light gray as the vertical bulkheads. But, the overheads could be white in shadow.

My Essex class and Saratoga CV-3 references are better and may provide some clues to how the overhead areas visible from outside the ship were painted during wartime. Those references indicate the overheads were painted white. Perhaps Enterprise CV-6 wartime overhead color reflected the same directives as the Essex class. Photos of some, but not all, of the Essex class show that the white color was carried down from the overhead onto the exterior vertical bulkheads a bit, probably as a counter-shading measure.

Notice in the photo of Essex class Yorktown CV-10 that the white counter-shading extends down the transverse girder supporting the flight deck. The white stops about the bottom edge of the longitudinal girders.

But the same girder on sistership Hornet CV-12 does not appear to be counter-shaded, likely 5H or 5L from top to bottom.

Also note that, generally, the hangar deck bulkheads forming the elevator wells of some but not all wartime ships were painted blue, probably because those areas were visible when viewed from the air when the elevators were lowered. This appears to be the case on the photo of Enterprise in December 1942 posted by Rick Davis and reposted here:

But in this photo of Enterprise in 1941, the bulkheads appear very light, perhaps light gray, maybe even silver.

In this wartime photo of Essex CV-9, there is both blue and gray (white?).

It appears that colors changed, and frequently.

Hopefully Tracy or Rick can provide more information about Enterprise CV-6.

[Brocky]

Hi Mark,

I'm not able to answer the color question definitively other than to say that photos indicate it was not blue, at least not a dark color like 5N. Tracy White probably has some documentation for the wartime color of overheads visible from outside the ship. He may have some pre-war documentation, too.

The pre-war photo below taken of sistership Hornet CV-8 in November, 1941, may be helpful. To my eye, the overheads all look to be painted the same light gray as the vertical bulkheads. But, the overheads could be white in shadow.

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the response.

Yes I'm inclined to agree with you on this. After searching the web a bit this past weekend and found that in most of the CV-5, CV-6 and CV-8 pictures it appears that the exposed overhead supports were painted the same as the vertical surfaces. And from most of them it would appear that Enterprise kept this practice through out the rest of here service in WW II.

I also received a copy of David Doyle's USS Yorktown [CV-5] book form his Legends of Warfare series and the pictures in it seemed to verify this for the Yorktown as well. Still waiting on a copy of the USS Enterprise [CV-6].

It appears that colors changed, and frequently.

I have found this to be the mantra when modeling any military artifact.
Thanks again,
Mark B.

.added clarification to the Legends of Warfare statement.

[JTninja]

The Meng kit arrived, and for a snap kit, im very impressed.

Here we have, from the Top

Tamiya Enterprise
Trumpeter Hornet
TOMs Modelworks Hornet replacement hull
Meng Enterprise




Im waiting for Academy's Enterprise and Trumpeters Yorktown to arrive as well. Once I do, I'll reproduce the above picture with them for comparision. I'll also compare lower hulls as well (though I lost my Hornet lower hull, oh the tragedy!).

[Charybdis]

A rare color photo of Enterprise tied up at New York Navy Yard, Brooklyn. June 1958. USS Independence on the opposite side.

[Devin]

Wow, now THERE'S a diorama idea.

[NigelR32]

The Meng kit arrived, and for a snap kit, im very impressed.

I'll also compare lower hulls as well (though I lost my Hornet lower hull, oh the tragedy!).

If you look around the house you probably repurposed it a door wedge.. about all it's good for

[Big Build]

Sooooo I�ve just been to my local hobby store, and what did I see, but a 1/200 enterprise cv-6...

WOW!

I know MK have a detail set for the 1/200 Yorktown, does anybody know if the major detail manufacturing companies like Pontos or MK are planning a detail set for the Enterprise?... I can�t be much different from the Yorktown...

Sorry if this is a repeat post, but I�ve trolled through the forums, and can�t find a thing...

Adrian

[Big Build]

G�day David,
I�m not 100% sure, but I believe it�s mid war, mostly because of the aircraft used in the kit...

Why?

[MartinJQuinn]

Adrian, what time period does that model represent as in pre-war, early, mid or late war?

I believe the 1/200 model represents Enterprise around October 1942, during the Battle of Santa Cruz.

[Big Build]

Is enterprise a Yorktown class?

How different is the Yorktown?... would the MK detail set work for the Enterprise? I do suspect there are a number of differences, I did hear on the grapevine that somebody was making a detail set, just not sure who.

[JTninja]

Yes, Enterprise is a Yorktown class carrier, the 2nd of 3.

The ships are very similar, with some minor differences in terms of smaller things like anti-air outfits.

They are noticeably different than the Hornet, the 3rd of the class, which was built separately, and had improvements.

[JBP41]

Sooooo I�ve just been to my local hobby store, and what did I see, but a 1/200 enterprise cv-6...

WOW!

I know MK have a detail set for the 1/200 Yorktown, does anybody know if the major detail manufacturing companies like Pontos or MK are planning a detail set for the Enterprise?... I can�t be much different from the Yorktown...

Sorry if this is a repeat post, but I�ve trolled through the forums, and can�t find a thing...

Adrian

Yes, both Pontos and MK are working on detail up sets for the 1/200 Enterprise. I'm not sure what Pontos has in the works specifically, but MK has posted some updates on their facebook page. They are doing MUCH more detail on the planes this time, including open cockpits and cockpit interiors. I had been waiting on the detail sets before I start the build, but I had started scratch building cockpits. I put that on hold with MK doing that for me.