The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Sun May 28, 2017 11:34 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post a reply
Post icon:
None
Username:
Subject:
Message body:
Enter your message here, it may contain no more than 60000 characters. 

Font size:
Font colour
Options:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF
Disable BBCode
Do not automatically parse URLs
Question
What is the name in the logo in the top left? (hint it's something dot com):
This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
   

Topic review - Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!
Author Message
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Tracy White wrote:
W.H.min wrote:
The data of Essex full load draft seems unreliable


This is quite true. AotS Intrepid quotes 30' "as built," whereas "Essex Class Carriers" by Alan Raven states 30' 10." Neither gives a source. My favorite reference is Warship International Vol 36, No 4 (1999) which is incredibly well sourced. The below is quoted from that (pages 341 & 2) and is from CV-16 (1943) and CV-37 (1946) "BuShips General Information Books."

"The waterline used as a basis for measurements was the designer's waterline, specifically the normal waterline corresponding to the designed normal load and draught. This waterline was 26-ft. 6-in. above the molded baseline."

Underline is mine here - the AotS Intrepid book lists the designed waterline as 27' 6" but I'm not sure where this came from. Typo or was Intrepid actually "designed" deeper than Lexington? There is no actual mention of a "full load as built" draught. There is a lot of discussion of overloading and mention that CV-17 Bunker Hill reported departing Ulithi in March of 1945 at 30' 5" draft, but that would have not been a draft used to plot where the boot topping went.

Also sort of a moot point as far as my ability to definitively answer the question as I haven't found any documentation on waterline and boot topping yet.

Thank you, Tracy. Really helpful to me!
Post Posted: Fri May 05, 2017 3:03 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
W.H.min wrote:
The data of Essex full load draft seems unreliable


This is quite true. AotS Intrepid quotes 30' "as built," whereas "Essex Class Carriers" by Alan Raven states 30' 10." Neither gives a source. My favorite reference is Warship International Vol 36, No 4 (1999) which is incredibly well sourced. The below is quoted from that (pages 341 & 2) and is from CV-16 (1943) and CV-37 (1946) "BuShips General Information Books."

"The waterline used as a basis for measurements was the designer's waterline, specifically the normal waterline corresponding to the designed normal load and draught. This waterline was 26-ft. 6-in. above the molded baseline."

Underline is mine here - the AotS Intrepid book lists the designed waterline as 27' 6" but I'm not sure where this came from. Typo or was Intrepid actually "designed" deeper than Lexington? There is no actual mention of a "full load as built" draught. There is a lot of discussion of overloading and mention that CV-17 Bunker Hill reported departing Ulithi in March of 1945 at 30' 5" draft, but that would have not been a draft used to plot where the boot topping went.

Also sort of a moot point as far as my ability to definitively answer the question as I haven't found any documentation on waterline and boot topping yet.
Post Posted: Fri May 05, 2017 1:00 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
It is a little big strange about the waterline of 1/350 Trumpeter's Essex class, is it lower? The data of Essex full load draft seems unreliable, can anyone tell me the true number, please? I looked some pictures on Navsource, I believe the waterline should move upward about 2mm.
Post Posted: Thu May 04, 2017 3:03 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
No Currently working on
I haven't purchased ether. Was considering The set from Toms does anyone have any experience with it?


Currently working on
1/350 Trumpeter Dreadnought 1918
Post Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:33 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Photo Etch 1/700 Dragon  Reply with quote
starman1950 wrote:
Hi I am going to build one of the Dragon 1/700 Essex class kits passably the Lexington or Essex. What is the best option for photo etch? Can the Fly Hawk set for Trumpeter be used or would the Toms set be a better option?

I will appreciate any thoughts on this matter.
Walter

Currently working on
1/350 Trumpeter Dreadnought 1918




The Trumpeter Essex Class kits are a bit under-scaled compared to the Dragon Kits or perhaps the Dragon is a bit over-scaled. Either way, they are not quite the same size. So I would guess that using PE for the Dragon Kit would be a safer bet if you have not purchased a set yet.
Post Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:19 pm
  Post subject:  Photo Etch 1/700 Dragon  Reply with quote
Hi I am going to build one of the Dragon 1/700 Essex class kits passably the Lexington or Essex. What is the best option for photo etch? Can the Fly Hawk set for Trumpeter be used or would the Toms set be a better option?

I will appreciate any thoughts on this matter.
Walter

Currently working on
1/350 Trumpeter Dreadnought 1918
Post Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:49 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Guest wrote:
Dick J, I'm on training wheels man! I haven't made a model in roughly 15 years, and I can't claim to have been very good at it then. I know I have much more patience now. Reading some of this thread and seeing how it has worn some of the folks out on here, that really seem to have a ton of skill, has me a bit intimidated.

If you want to use the CV-14 deck, find out what time frame it is intended for. If the deck is for late '45, it might fit CV-12 - an exact fit for a late '45 CV-12, and for a mid-war CV-12 you should only need to notch it for the two port side 40MM. (Although the CV-14 deck will have the second catapult.) If the CV-14 deck is for either as-commissioned or her '44 deployment config, it will be short and can't be used on CV-12. Personally, I don't use the after market wood decks myself. That is a personal preference and what you want on your model is up to you.

Don't let the ability of others on this board intimidate you. I am a modeler, but I am better at the history and research side than I am at the modeling side. I don't let that stop me. Build the model for yourself. If you are happy with it, that is all that matters ultimately. Even the "super experts" don't get all the details exactly right so don't get too down on yourself. :thumbs_up_1:
Post Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:31 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Thanks for the info so far guys!

MartinJQuinn wrote:
Best starting point for a CV-12 in dazzle would be the Essex kit.


Tracy White wrote:
Was it Pontos?


I have the 1/350 C-10. I was looking at the Pontos C-10 full upgrade kit and then just the deck kit for C-9 since it also has decals for C-12. Both of those kits have the darker stain. Then I saw the Artwox 1/350 CV-14 deck kit which is unstained. Don't know if that would fit since it is a long hull.

Should I buy the Trumpeter C-9 and the Pontos C-9 kit, or can I buy the Prontos C-9 kit or the Artwox kit and make a C-12 work?

Dick J, I'm on training wheels man! I haven't made a model in roughly 15 years, and I can't claim to have been very good at it then. I know I have much more patience now. Reading some of this thread and seeing how it has worn some of the folks out on here, that really seem to have a ton of skill, has me a bit intimidated.
Post Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:32 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Guest wrote:
On Ebay, I noticed that the only unstained Essex wood deck is for the CV-14 Ticonderoga. Would that deck fit seeing that CV-14 was a long hull?

To build on what Tracy said, The first two (possibly the first three) long hulls were built with a shorter flightdeck, both fore and aft, to allow the bow and stern quad 40MM to have greater arcs of fire. Those ships also had a large cutout of the flightdeck aft of the forward port side 5" gun gallery that was intended for a third MK-37 director (which was never fitted). The aviators disliked both features, so only Hancock went to war with the short deck and port side cutout. Ticonderoga had the forward end of the deck restored to full length and the big cutout filled out before she deployed. The after end of her flightdeck was lengthened while she received repairs from kamikaze damage. If Randolph ever had the short deck and cutout, they were restored to the full length/width deck within a month of commissioning. All other long hulls commissioned with the full flightdeck.

The early Essex class had the two quad 40MM mounts in the port side galleries for the single 5" guns slightly elevated, also to allow them to have greater arcs of fire. This required small cutouts in the flight deck. Later in the war, when the Essex's had more quad mounts and the need to fire across the deck went away, the quads in those two galleries were lowered to the same level as the 5" mounts, and the deck cutouts were eliminated.

How this applies to your afore-mentioned deck is that you have to know which Tico config the deck fits, and which Hornet config you are trying to fit it to. (Hornet had the two small port side cutouts until her '45 refit/repair.)
Post Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 4:21 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
The long hulls (including Tico) were launched with shorter flight decks than the short hulls. Tico's was extended to match the length of the other ships before the end of the war. so it depends on whether the company that made that deck did the short deck or the long deck. Was it Pontos?

Also, an addition to the blurb that Martin posted from John. Flight Deck Stain 21 had two different versions. The first was essentially similar to the vertical color 5-O Ocean Gray. It was later revised to match 5-N Navy Blue, but the designation was kept the same. So, if you're doing Hornet very early I would go with the earlier shade, but anything after the middle of 1944 should be the later, darker shade.

The Development of Naval Camouflage 1914 - 1945 Part V: United States Navy - World War II.
Post Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:41 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Guest wrote:
Hi, I am wanting to make a CV-12 Hornet. My grandfather server on her until the end of the war. I bought a trumpeter CV-10 Yorktown since they are both short hulls. Is the CV-10 a kit I can use to make the CV-12 or should I get the CV-9 Essex?

I have also read that the CV-12 used a lighter blue deck stain than the others, does anyone know the actual color?

On Ebay, I noticed that the only unstained Essex wood deck is for the CV-14 Ticonderoga. Would that deck fit seeing that CV-14 was a long hull?

I'll probably have a lot more questions, but those are a good start for now.

Hornet was basically unmodified from her commissioning in 1943 until her refit after her forward flight deck was damaged in 1945. Best starting point for a CV-12 in dazzle would be the Essex kit. I'm building one myself (one of many 1/2 finished projects).

Here is a quote from our resident camouflage expert, John Synder, regarding the flight deck stain:
John Snyder wrote:
USN flight decks in WW2 were not painted, but rather were stained in either Norfolk 250-N Flight Deck Stain (1941-42), or Flight Deck Stain 21 (1943-45 and on into Korea). This stain was subject to fading under the hot sun of the Pacific, and to wear from aircraft handling. It did not stay pristine for long.

I'll leave the length of the flight deck question to more knowledgeable folks.
Post Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:02 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Hi, I am wanting to make a CV-12 Hornet. My grandfather server on her until the end of the war. I bought a trumpeter CV-10 Yorktown since they are both short hulls. Is the CV-10 a kit I can use to make the CV-12 or should I get the CV-9 Essex?

I have also read that the CV-12 used a lighter blue deck stain than the others, does anyone know the actual color?

On Ebay, I noticed that the only unstained Essex wood deck is for the CV-14 Ticonderoga. Would that deck fit seeing that CV-14 was a long hull?

I'll probably have a lot more questions, but those are a good start for now.
Post Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:29 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
For the second time in a row, we have a WWII Essex class fans thread (this one) and a Cold War Essex class thread.
Post Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:18 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Does anyone make 1/1800 scale Essex deck decals, specifically for the SCB-125s?

Sigh. Didn't think so.

I'd like to pick up one of Shapeways' SCB-125 Essexes, but not unless I can do justice to that unique pattern on the angle deck. I'm not good at freehanding, and the size is kinda small to try masking or stencils.

I thought about buying the Starfighter 1200 decals, scanning them and laser-printing them out in reduced size on my own decal paper. Would that work?
Post Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:39 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Cold-war Essex Class Fans thread, maybe? No context.
Post Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:42 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
I'm looking at modelling CV-9 in late '43 - early '44.

The level of detail isn't really critical though as it won't be highly visible through the open shutters, but would like to have seen a photo of the original fwd elevator arrangement if there was one around (also the whole subject interests me as I work as an applications engineer in the elevator industry).
Post Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 12:26 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Rob-UK wrote:
I've just started my build of CV-9, currently in the early stages, but notice the kit centre-line elevators are both up and down position at the same time! As I'm having both elevators up, am having to cut out the elevators in the hangar deck and create an elevator pit with a portion of 2nd Deck. I've referenced photo of Hornet's forward elevator pit (copied below), does anyone know of any photo of the aft elevator? I'm assuming it is much the same, but naturally without the forward end bulkhead.

I also noticed the bulkheads around the forward elevator are painted grey (similar to the outer vertical surfaces), whereas the rest of the internal hangar bulkheads appear to be white.

One more point, I noticed that the 'Anatomy of a ship' book for Intrepid shows two direct acting hydraulic jacks under each elevator, but none visible on the Hornet photo, just elevator ropes and pulleys suggesting indirect acting jacks under the the elevator pit, I'm wondering if different types of centre-line elevators may have been used in different members of the class?

Image

Image

(images courtesy of NavSource.org)


Out of curiosity, what time period are you wanting to depict?

i.e., original? late '43 to early '44? mid '44 to early '45? later 1945?
Post Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:23 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
The photo is described as 'post war', when in mothballs, so that may be the case.

Edit to post: the elevator in the 'post war' photo is still the same now - there's a video on You-Tube of someone's USS Hornet museum trip (in 2016) in which they'e filmed the elevator - it looks identical to the photo, which does suggest the one in the photo is a later model :). So, we can probably conclude the WWII era forward elevator would very likely have been supported on the two direct acting jacks, as the diagrams in the 'Anatomy of a ship' for USS Intrepid.
Post Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 4:09 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Which photo pf Hornet's forward Elevator are you using - is it a wartime shot? Post-war the elevators were changed out for different units that coul dhandle the larger and heavier aircraft.
Post Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:50 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all WWII Essex Class Carrier Fans!  Reply with quote
Yes indeed, although hydraulic elevators can sometimes have the cylinders/jacks positioned horizontally below the pit and involve a sheaves and rope arrangement, probably with a 2:1 ratio, to provide the final lift (as is the case with the side elevator), referred to as 'indirect acting' elevator hydraulics.

With regard to the forward elevator, as the photo of USS Hornet's forward pit shows no sign of direct acting jacks directly under the elevator platform, this could be an indirect acting arrangement, also there appears to be strengthened suspension structures in the corners of the elevator platform, with the guide rails in the middle. There is also mention of sheave points on the CV-12 focsle level plans and cut outs in the 2nd deck corresponding with the apparent lifting points on the photo, which also leads me to understand this is the case.
Post Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2017 2:54 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group