Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
sgtryan13 wrote: Themongoose wrote: I’ve had good luck getting answers to obscure questions here. So let’s try another one… I am looking for photo etch drop tank hangars for modern carriers. One/350 scale. I found a guy on a Czek forum that was adding them to his enterprise. Unfortunately, he didn’t say whether he bought them or made them. I spent a lot of time copying and pasting into Google translate to try and figure that out. Here’s what they look like. Tom's model works makes a set of 1/350 drop tank racks for post ww2 carriers. I bought a set and it arrived the other day. Looks more like a ww2 set that's been relabeled. It has circular holders on the ends of the down braces. I tried to see what f there was a way to still use them if i cut off the circles but the width of the down bars is too narrow for a 1/350 drop tank to fit in-between them. I’m on the hunt again.
[quote="sgtryan13"][quote="Themongoose"]I’ve had good luck getting answers to obscure questions here. So let’s try another one… I am looking for photo etch drop tank hangars for modern carriers. One/350 scale. I found a guy on a Czek forum that was adding them to his enterprise. Unfortunately, he didn’t say whether he bought them or made them. I spent a lot of time copying and pasting into Google translate to try and figure that out. Here’s what they look like. [img]https://photos.smugmug.com/Model-Uloads/i-Nh8Bf5b/0/C63NJVg2FkcHvvcXpH3hGqC6CdrQQWnjBqwHXq4tS/X2/IMG_5635-X2.jpg[/img][/quote]
Tom's model works makes a set of 1/350 drop tank racks for post ww2 carriers.[/quote]
I bought a set and it arrived the other day. Looks more like a ww2 set that's been relabeled. It has circular holders on the ends of the down braces. I tried to see what f there was a way to still use them if i cut off the circles but the width of the down bars is too narrow for a 1/350 drop tank to fit in-between them. I’m on the hunt again.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2024 11:32 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
1/700 USS Forrestal |
|
|
Greetings, Ran across this a few days ago. I bought it and will update this thread when I get it. It looks to be a pretty good 1/700 Forrestal kit. From the pics, I think that it is circa 1962 right up to the fire, July 1967. I plan to do CVW-17 right before the fire. There is another 3D Kit of Forrestal, but it looked "clunky" to me. The elevators were way to thick and so forth. I am hoping that this is a good, reasonably accurate (whatever that really means!) Forrestal. If it is, it could also be used to do Saratoga and with the Model Monkey Island, a bit broader range of dates. (1970-1975) Ranger and Indy had enough differences that I doubt that this kit would be good for those ships, at least without a lot of scratch building. https://www.ebay.com/itm/364706119387https://www.model-monkey.com/product-pa ... -1970-1975Mark edit: whoops! My intent was to put this thread in the calling all ships Forrestal thread. Need some help from a moderator. Many apologies....
Greetings,
Ran across this a few days ago. I bought it and will update this thread when I get it. It looks to be a pretty good 1/700 Forrestal kit. From the pics, I think that it is circa 1962 right up to the fire, July 1967. I plan to do CVW-17 right before the fire. There is another 3D Kit of Forrestal, but it looked "clunky" to me. The elevators were way to thick and so forth. I am hoping that this is a good, reasonably accurate (whatever that really means!) Forrestal. If it is, it could also be used to do Saratoga and with the Model Monkey Island, a bit broader range of dates. (1970-1975) Ranger and Indy had enough differences that I doubt that this kit would be good for those ships, at least without a lot of scratch building.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/364706119387
https://www.model-monkey.com/product-page/1-700-uss-saratoga-cv-60-island-1970-1975
Mark
edit: whoops! My intent was to put this thread in the calling all ships Forrestal thread. Need some help from a moderator. Many apologies....
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2024 4:57 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Themongoose wrote: I’ve had good luck getting answers to obscure questions here. So let’s try another one… I am looking for photo etch drop tank hangars for modern carriers. One/350 scale. I found a guy on a Czek forum that was adding them to his enterprise. Unfortunately, he didn’t say whether he bought them or made them. I spent a lot of time copying and pasting into Google translate to try and figure that out. Here’s what they look like. Tom's model works makes a set of 1/350 drop tank racks for post ww2 carriers.
[quote="Themongoose"]I’ve had good luck getting answers to obscure questions here. So let’s try another one… I am looking for photo etch drop tank hangars for modern carriers. One/350 scale. I found a guy on a Czek forum that was adding them to his enterprise. Unfortunately, he didn’t say whether he bought them or made them. I spent a lot of time copying and pasting into Google translate to try and figure that out. Here’s what they look like. [img]https://photos.smugmug.com/Model-Uloads/i-Nh8Bf5b/0/C63NJVg2FkcHvvcXpH3hGqC6CdrQQWnjBqwHXq4tS/X2/IMG_5635-X2.jpg[/img][/quote]
Tom's model works makes a set of 1/350 drop tank racks for post ww2 carriers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2024 9:40 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Amphion wrote: It does! It is an amazing break down. It really helps people to understand the different layers of "layered defense".
[quote="Amphion"]Does this help any?
[img]https://www.1999.co.jp/itbig46/10465380z.jpg[/img]
Source: [url]https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10465380[/url][/quote] It does! It is an amazing break down. It really helps people to understand the different layers of "layered defense".
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2024 4:18 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Thanks Rick! If you calculate on for example a F14 who is 19 meters long it would be 2,71 centimeters in 1:700 and 2,63 centimeters in 1:720 (yes, I'm European ) . So I reasoned that it would be not that big a difference. I will do a thorough comparison with the kit planes against the Pitroad ones and get back here. Rick_H wrote: If you need some extra a/c for the Italeri kit, let me know. I will do that sir!
Thanks Rick! If you calculate on for example a F14 who is 19 meters long it would be 2,71 centimeters in 1:700 and 2,63 centimeters in 1:720 (yes, I'm European ;) ) . So I reasoned that it would be not that big a difference. I will do a thorough comparison with the kit planes against the Pitroad ones and get back here.
[quote="Rick_H"]If you need some extra a/c for the Italeri kit, let me know.[/quote]
I will do that sir! :thumbs_up_1:
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2024 3:36 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Those aircraft are a fair amount too big for that Italeri 1/720 scale kit. As for the airwing composition, the F/A-18 is too late and the A-4 is too early. That leaves you with an airwing accurate for the mid-1980s. I believe those squadrons on the decal sheet served on the Carl Vinson, not Ranger, but that is getting pretty far into the weeds. (If you want to dig and get really precise, take a look at http://www.gonavy.jp/CVW-NEf.html and scroll down to CVW-2 in the 1980s and see the exact squadron makeup.) Again though, Pitroad aircraft are a bit big for 1/700 and the Italeri kit is smaller than 1/700. Take a look at the aircraft in the kit and compare a similar one to the Pitroad one. If you need some extra a/c for the Italeri kit, let me know. Rick
Those aircraft are a fair amount too big for that Italeri 1/720 scale kit.
As for the airwing composition, the F/A-18 is too late and the A-4 is too early. That leaves you with an airwing accurate for the mid-1980s. I believe those squadrons on the decal sheet served on the Carl Vinson, not Ranger, but that is getting pretty far into the weeds. (If you want to dig and get really precise, take a look at [url]http://www.gonavy.jp/CVW-NEf.html[/url] and scroll down to CVW-2 in the 1980s and see the exact squadron makeup.)
Again though, Pitroad aircraft are a bit big for 1/700 and the Italeri kit is smaller than 1/700. Take a look at the aircraft in the kit and compare a similar one to the Pitroad one. If you need some extra a/c for the Italeri kit, let me know. Rick
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2024 3:08 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Hi all, I'm slowly building a USS Ranger from Italeri. I als have a extra aircraft kit from Pitroad. The italeri: 20240201_212943 by Ronald Halma, on Flickr The Pitroad set: 20240224_152434 by Ronald Halma, on Flickr The decals: 20240224_152422 by Ronald Halma, on Flickr My question is where I can situate the ship in time with these planes and the ones in the kit? Thanks in advance!
Hi all, I'm slowly building a USS Ranger from Italeri. I als have a extra aircraft kit from Pitroad. The italeri:
[url=https://flic.kr/p/2pA232A][img]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53549861004_8b15650918_c.jpg[/img][/url][url=https://flic.kr/p/2pA232A]20240201_212943[/url] by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/52307730@N06/]Ronald Halma[/url], on Flickr
The Pitroad set:
[url=https://flic.kr/p/2pA2y33][img]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53549961950_92433cafee_c.jpg[/img][/url][url=https://flic.kr/p/2pA2y33]20240224_152434[/url] by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/52307730@N06/]Ronald Halma[/url], on Flickr
The decals:
[url=https://flic.kr/p/2pA1ZHs][img]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53549853224_ab8e90d283_c.jpg[/img][/url][url=https://flic.kr/p/2pA1ZHs]20240224_152422[/url] by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/52307730@N06/]Ronald Halma[/url], on Flickr
My question is where I can situate the ship in time with these planes and the ones in the kit? Thanks in advance! :thumbs_up_1:
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2024 2:35 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
I’ve had good luck getting answers to obscure questions here. So let’s try another one… I am looking for photo etch drop tank hangars for modern carriers. One/350 scale. I found a guy on a Czek forum that was adding them to his enterprise. Unfortunately, he didn’t say whether he bought them or made them. I spent a lot of time copying and pasting into Google translate to try and figure that out. Here’s what they look like.
I’ve had good luck getting answers to obscure questions here. So let’s try another one… I am looking for photo etch drop tank hangars for modern carriers. One/350 scale. I found a guy on a Czek forum that was adding them to his enterprise. Unfortunately, he didn’t say whether he bought them or made them. I spent a lot of time copying and pasting into Google translate to try and figure that out. Here’s what they look like. [img]https://photos.smugmug.com/Model-Uloads/i-Nh8Bf5b/0/C63NJVg2FkcHvvcXpH3hGqC6CdrQQWnjBqwHXq4tS/X2/IMG_5635-X2.jpg[/img]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2024 12:14 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
DavidP wrote: would the Saratoga 1993 BOGPs be of any use in that area? CV-60 - USS Saratoga - Booklet of General Plans, 1993 https://maritime.org/doc/plans/cv60.pdfAbsolutely perfect for my needs!!
[quote="DavidP"]would the Saratoga 1993 BOGPs be of any use in that area? CV-60 - USS Saratoga - Booklet of General Plans, 1993 https://maritime.org/doc/plans/cv60.pdf[/quote]
Absolutely perfect for my needs!! :woo_hoo:
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2024 1:47 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Does anyone have pics of the focsle by chance? There are some in the detail & scale Big E book but they are small and in black & white. I searched on here but nothing came up so hoping someone might have them from a tour or other sources. I’m modeling the Kitty Hawk right now so any of the class would be good. Chris I’ve got a pretty unique opportunity with my latest build. I’m lifting the flight deck 4” off the hull with a set of linear motors. As a result the bow area will be visible. Since the anchor hause holes are just above the deck on the Trumpeter 1/350 KittyHawk i thought i’d add some interest to this area and model the focsle. I found a few pics online. Hoping someone has some cleaner shots that really show the layout. Here’s what i have to start with
Does anyone have pics of the focsle by chance? There are some in the detail & scale Big E book but they are small and in black & white. I searched on here but nothing came up so hoping someone might have them from a tour or other sources. I’m modeling the Kitty Hawk right now so any of the class would be good. Chris
I’ve got a pretty unique opportunity with my latest build. I’m lifting the flight deck 4” off the hull with a set of linear motors. As a result the bow area will be visible. Since the anchor hause holes are just above the deck on the Trumpeter 1/350 KittyHawk i thought i’d add some interest to this area and model the focsle. I found a few pics online. Hoping someone has some cleaner shots that really show the layout. Here’s what i have to start with [url=https://themaddmongoose.smugmug.com/CVN-63-USS-KittyHawk/i-ZGqXPVq/A][img]https://photos.smugmug.com/CVN-63-USS-KittyHawk/i-ZGqXPVq/1/972bc850/L/IMG_6421-L.jpg[/img][/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2024 4:15 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
I see well it's the "same" Sea Sparrow missile just a different version having the first Sea Sparrow being a very simple navalized AIM-7 Sparrow for the BPDMS while the NSSM uses the much improved and developed missile. Interesting that it is extremely difficult to find drawings (Top, Side and/or Front view) of this older launcher and illuminator. I'm no modeller but digital artist hence I require such top/side and/or front view drawings to make my own drawings. As for people interested about the Sea Mauler system, here is the secret projects thread about it: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thread ... -sam.2936/
I see well it's the "same" Sea Sparrow missile just a different version having the first Sea Sparrow being a very simple navalized AIM-7 Sparrow for the BPDMS while the NSSM uses the much improved and developed missile. Interesting that it is extremely difficult to find drawings (Top, Side and/or Front view) of this older launcher and illuminator. I'm no modeller but digital artist hence I require such top/side and/or front view drawings to make my own drawings. As for people interested about the Sea Mauler system, here is the secret projects thread about it: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mauler-sam.2936/
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2023 1:52 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
This USNI article elaborates upon Rick's excellent summary of the BPDMS/Mk25 launcher+Mk115 illuminator system, and also talks about how it evolved: https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-hi ... ile-system
This USNI article elaborates upon Rick's excellent summary of the BPDMS/Mk25 launcher+Mk115 illuminator system, and also talks about how it evolved: https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2018/december/seasparrow-surface-air-missile-system
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:08 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
TZoli wrote: Isn't BPDMS the same as the Sea Sparrow, having only different launchers? BPDMS having a 2-4-2 box launcher while the Nato Sea Sparrow having a 4-4 box launcher? Visually, yes, although the pedestal is different too. BPDMS sits on a cradle, similar to a small ASROC launcher, while the NSSMS is mounted on a single (large) post. But the missiles are considerably different. BPDMS much slower, and with optical direction only (a director with a human and a bicycle-handle thing.) With our BPDMS, the Combat Systems doctrine was in case of an incoming missile, to shoot with the 5" gun until in BPDMS range, then fire the missile and check fire on the gun, so we would not shoot down our outbound missile. And "us" was the mighty Stein, FF-1065. The ship had a BPDMS throughout her USN life, and apparently into her life in the Mexican Navy, serving as ARM Ignacio Allende, only recently decommissioned and scrapped. I wonder if the Mexican ever cured her of that half degree port list when all the tanks were full, caused by a later 1980-ish addition of an off-center fresh water tank.
[quote="TZoli"]Isn't BPDMS the same as the Sea Sparrow, having only different launchers? BPDMS having a 2-4-2 box launcher while the Nato Sea Sparrow having a 4-4 box launcher?[/quote]
Visually, yes, although the pedestal is different too. BPDMS sits on a cradle, similar to a small ASROC launcher, while the NSSMS is mounted on a single (large) post.
But the missiles are considerably different. BPDMS much slower, and with optical direction only (a director with a human and a bicycle-handle thing.) With our BPDMS, the Combat Systems doctrine was in case of an incoming missile, to shoot with the 5" gun until in BPDMS range, then fire the missile and check fire on the gun, so we would not shoot down our outbound missile.
And "us" was the mighty Stein, FF-1065. The ship had a BPDMS throughout her USN life, and apparently into her life in the Mexican Navy, serving as ARM Ignacio Allende, only recently decommissioned and scrapped. I wonder if the Mexican ever cured her of that half degree port list when all the tanks were full, caused by a later 1980-ish addition of an off-center fresh water tank.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:23 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Isn't BPDMS the same as the Sea Sparrow, having only different launchers? BPDMS having a 2-4-2 box launcher while the Nato Sea Sparrow having a 4-4 box launcher?
Isn't BPDMS the same as the Sea Sparrow, having only different launchers? BPDMS having a 2-4-2 box launcher while the Nato Sea Sparrow having a 4-4 box launcher?
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:53 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Does this help any?
[img]https://www.1999.co.jp/itbig46/10465380z.jpg[/img]
Source: [url]https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10465380[/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:04 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
once again, providing partial information... When I was on the San Diego waterfront in the late 80s, USS Downes (FF-1070) was unique among the Knoxes in that she had a Mk23 TAS, as you say, with no other "proper" FC director for her Nato Sea Sparrow missile. At that time, Downes was the only FF with the NSSMS, while the rest of us still had BPDMS or CIWS. On Navsource for FF-1070, there are three great photos of Downes showing that TAS antenna at the middle of the mack, marked 1 June 1983. Also, https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/11.ancient4/karte035.en.html
once again, providing partial information... When I was on the San Diego waterfront in the late 80s, USS Downes (FF-1070) was unique among the Knoxes in that she had a Mk23 TAS, as you say, with no other "proper" FC director for her Nato Sea Sparrow missile. At that time, Downes was the only FF with the NSSMS, while the rest of us still had BPDMS or CIWS. On Navsource for FF-1070, there are three great photos of Downes showing that TAS antenna at the middle of the mack, marked 1 June 1983.
Also, [url]https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/11.ancient4/karte035.en.html[/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2023 3:11 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Admhawk wrote: Page 6, Island (and mast) levels, identifies it as the TAS Platform. Combat fleets of the world books list MK23 TAS as being installed on these carriers. The only Mk48 in any list of Military equipment is a Torpedo, Sea Sparrow Launcher or gun.
Disregard the labeling on the plans, it is a mistake (or referring to something arcane, like the pedestal or electrical box). Not common, but not unheard of.
It is a MK23 TAS. Maybe the radar antennae the Mark 23 TAS uses is actually an older Mark 48 one? Not unheard of as the early SPS-67 uses the the same older SPS-10 antennae. Do you have any drawings (top/side/front) view of the Mark 23 TAS? I presume it is required for the Sea Sparrow missile for ships which did not have dedicated Missile Fire control radars?
[quote="Admhawk"]Page 6, Island (and mast) levels, identifies it as the TAS Platform. Combat fleets of the world books list MK23 TAS as being installed on these carriers. The only Mk48 in any list of Military equipment is a Torpedo, Sea Sparrow Launcher or gun.
Disregard the labeling on the plans, it is a mistake (or referring to something arcane, like the pedestal or electrical box). Not common, but not unheard of.
It is a MK23 TAS.[/quote]
Maybe the radar antennae the Mark 23 TAS uses is actually an older Mark 48 one? Not unheard of as the early SPS-67 uses the the same older SPS-10 antennae.
Do you have any drawings (top/side/front) view of the Mark 23 TAS? I presume it is required for the Sea Sparrow missile for ships which did not have dedicated Missile Fire control radars?
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2023 1:48 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Page 6, Island (and mast) levels, identifies it as the TAS Platform. Combat fleets of the world books list MK23 TAS as being installed on these carriers. The only Mk48 in any list of Military equipment is a Torpedo, Sea Sparrow Launcher or gun.
Disregard the labeling on the plans, it is a mistake (or referring to something arcane, like the pedestal or electrical box). Not common, but not unheard of.
It is a MK23 TAS.
Page 6, Island (and mast) levels, identifies it as the TAS Platform. Combat fleets of the world books list MK23 TAS as being installed on these carriers. The only Mk48 in any list of Military equipment is a Torpedo, Sea Sparrow Launcher or gun.
Disregard the labeling on the plans, it is a mistake (or referring to something arcane, like the pedestal or electrical box). Not common, but not unheard of.
It is a MK23 TAS.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2023 11:46 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
The closest I could find is the Mark 23 TAS - Target Acquisition System - radar [url]https://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/11.ancient4/karte035.en.html[/url]
Wiki shows a number of photos of this system but they seem a bit different from the Mark 48 one [url]https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Mark_23_Target_Acquisition_System#/media/File:USS_Caron_(DD-970)_mainmast_1983.jpg[/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2023 9:56 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all Forrestal class & Kitty Hawk class CV Fans |
|
|
Well, here's my opinion. As you said, it doesn't sound like a Navy system, as plain ol' "Mk 48 Mod 0" is not in the A/N system. As you said, it looks to me like the civilian Decca navigation radar we had on my first ship. I can't find the exact name of that type of antenna, but when you said "rotating rod", I think we are on the same page.
In your first photo (the big one), we are looking at it from the end, and it looks to me that there is a feed horn facing that rotating element. Looking at the Decca radartutorial web page, it seems that this rotating element can come in different lengths, so I think your best guess is to scale it according to some other known component on the mast - I believe the SPS-10 antenna is 11' wide and the SPS-48E antenna is 17' square.
On the other hand... Are you sure the three photos of Forrestal are all from the same period as your drawing? On the big photo, I don't see the SPS-49 antenna that should be visible, even though it is mounted on the outboard side of the center of the stacks. Edit - never mind, I do seethe SPS-49 antenna peeking through the woods. Still I hope all your material is from the same time. Best of luck, Rick
Well, here's my opinion. As you said, it doesn't sound like a Navy system, as plain ol' "Mk 48 Mod 0" is not in the A/N system. As you said, it looks to me like the civilian Decca navigation radar we had on my first ship. I can't find the exact name of that type of antenna, but when you said "rotating rod", I think we are on the same page.
In your first photo (the big one), we are looking at it from the end, and it looks to me that there is a feed horn facing that rotating element. Looking at the Decca radartutorial web page, it seems that this rotating element can come in different lengths, so I think your best guess is to scale it according to some other known component on the mast - I believe the SPS-10 antenna is 11' wide and the SPS-48E antenna is 17' square.
On the other hand... Are you sure the three photos of Forrestal are all from the same period as your drawing? On the big photo, I don't see the SPS-49 antenna that should be visible, even though it is mounted on the outboard side of the center of the stacks. Edit - never mind, I do seethe SPS-49 antenna peeking through the woods. Still I hope all your material is from the same time. Best of luck, Rick
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2023 8:09 am |
|
|
|
|