The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 6:56 pm

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
type everything in between the quote marks: "N0$pam" Note the Zero:
This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
   

Topic review - Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans
Author Message
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
https://www.navsource.org/archives/04/055/0405503.jpg
Apparently, the inset stern light was retrofitted to Cleveland. So this would be correct for the 1945 fit kit.
Post Posted: Thu Mar 28, 2024 6:50 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
I did briefly consider doing a square bridge conversion using ModelMonkey parts but there are too many other differences, relocated aft 40mm twin, swapped director positions, I didn't feel like that much surgery on this project.

It looks like the CL-55 kit has a stern cavity and is therefore incorrect, but fine for CL-62. It's a shame both kits show a ship with the 6x2 + 4x4 Bofors configuration.
Post Posted: Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:35 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
A small detail difference between the Cleveland CL-55 and Columbia CL-56 and all other ships of the Cleveland class was the stern lights. The first two ships had them mounted outside the hull plating. All other ships had a cavity in the stern, just to the starboard of the centerline, with the lights mounted in this recess.

It would be interesting to see if the two kits actually show this difference. If so, the Birmingham kit would be a better choice for the later round bridge Clevelands.

Starting with the Vincennes CL-64 ships of the Cleveland class had square bridges without the round armored pilot house and some changes to the after superstructure. The earlier kits would require major modifications.

Here is a history of the Cleveland class. However, it doesn't go into the small details about gun configurations over time.

https://www.okieboat.com/Cleveland%20Cl ... story.html

Phil
Post Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2024 10:23 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Thank you Dick.

Yes, that helps a lot. I hadn't spotted all the differences in the supporting structure of the forward quad 40mm for example.

I think the decision is fairly simple then: get the Birmingham kit, just in case the plastic is not the same it has the greater feature commonality with the later ships. Then after I have it in hand, decide if I do the simple thing and cut down the rear 40mm tub supports to make Denver, or backdate it to Birmingham in 1944.

It's a tough call because I prefer the port side of pattern 6D but the starboard side of pattern 3D :rolf_3:
Post Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2024 3:21 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
I can't speak to the plastic that is included in each kit, although the CAD correctly depicts the differences in the quad 40MM supporting structure between Cleveland and Birmingham. However, the actual ship differences mean that whichever option you choose, some plastic surgery will be required.

Cleveland commissioned with 4 twin 40MM and added another pair prior to departure for the Pacific. The forward twins were high up in the forward superstructure, above the beam 5" twins. Immediately aft of the 5" mounts, a single 20MM was on a projection of the O-1 level on each side. The quad 40MM were added in a late-war refit, and the supporting structure of the forward quads essentially matched that for the after quads - unique in the round-bridge members of the class.

Columbia and Montpelier deleted the forward twin 40MM and added a box structure aft of the forward twin 5" mounts (partially supported by the original projecting structure for the single 20MM), placing these quads at the O-2 level. So these two went to war with 2 quads and 4 twins. The after quads came in late-war refits. So, to do either of these from the Birmingham kit would require scratch-building the structure under the forward quads.

Starting with Denver, the forward quads were atop a rounded structure (properly depicted in the Birmingham CAD), and this became standard for the forward mounts on subsequent sisters. However, Denver was the first round-bridge Cleveland to get the after quad 40MM, and these were mounted at the O-1 level - unique for the class. So, to depict Denver, this structure would have to be cut down and the tubs lowered.

Variations in 20MM positioning should be easier to reproduce. I hope this helps with your decision.
Post Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2024 11:59 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Hi all,

I'm considering getting one of those Very Fire 1/350 Cleveland class kits, but I want to build a ship in dazzle.

First question, are the Cleveland and Birmingham kits the same plastic and etch in different boxes? A quick glance at the sprues and instructions online would suggest so, but I just wanted to check.

Now the main one: which member of the class, wearing dazzle, requires least modification from one of the base kits? The main candidates seem to be:

Denver
Birmingham
Montpelier

I'm leaning against Montpelier because I prefer the other Ms.33 patterns, but her AA fit seems to match the kits so she remains a good option.

Birmingham is my preferred pattern (Ms.33/6D) but seems to have worn the dazzle before the AA upgrades. I'm wondering, does the kit include spare tubs and parts to ease this backdate? I think I can see some 20mm tubs on the sprues but not sure.

That leaves Denver, which seems to have the same AA fit as represented in the Very Fire Birmingham kit while wearing Ms.33/3D.

Have I missed anything? Other detail differences between class members? What do people think, which would you choose and why?

Thanks :wave_1:
Post Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2024 5:56 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
David, Seamews would be nice, I read they were made "for the cruisers" but unfortunately Mobile had kingfishers.
Yes, thank goodness for Krakken! The FC radars will be nice along with the SC from Black Cat models. It's a nice time to be a ship modeler!
Post Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2024 2:53 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
DanCinSD, I'm also planning a hangar for a 1/350 Very Fire Cleveland class, but for a NOV1942 Operation Torch Cleveland CL55.

The big attraction for me (besides the Ms12 Mod camo) is that Cleveland's VCS12 deployed with Curtiss SO3C Seamews. I owe another big thanks to ISW's Jon Warneke for 3D printing both fixed wing and folded wing Seamews for me. Two Seamews on the catapults and one below in the hangar, wearing the yellow roundel of Operation Torch, will be unique.

And I'm in debt to Kraken's Matt Enoch, again, for his tall 3D-printed Mk4 radars.
Post Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2024 1:50 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Thank you, Ian, for identifying the two Mark 3 antennae.

I'm all thumbs when it comes to assembling pe radar antenna. Lucky for me that ISW's Jon Warneke has provided me with two outstanding 3D Mod 2s for a NOV1942 Cleveland CL55 and Kraken Hobbies' Matt Enoch has provided me with an outstanding 3D Mod 1 for a JAN1945 Nashville CL43.

Simply gluing these 3D antennae atop the FCDs is so much easier than fussing with pe!
Post Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2024 12:56 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
DrPR and Dick J, thank you for the help!
Interesting information, USS mobile can move forward.
Post Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2024 8:44 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
The Cleveland CL-55 did have a 5" twin loading machine at frame 105 between the after superstructure and barbette #3 (BUSHIPS drawing No. 379141, Main Deck General Arrangement, CL55 microfilm Reel 1 Frame 5).

The USS Miami CL-89 also had the 5" twin practice loading machine at frame 105 between the aft superstructure and turret #3 (USS Miami Booklet of General Plans, Plan No. 7, Main Deck BUSHIPS No. CL89-S0103-600502).

So both the early round bridge and later square bridge ships had the 5" loader in about the same position.

****
The Cleveland blueprints have 41 drawings of the airplane elevator.

The Miami Booklet of General Plans also shows an elevator pit in the hanger space.

So it looks like all of the Cleveland class had an airplane elevator.

Phil
Post Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2024 1:02 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Did the Clevelands have 2, 5" practice loaders between turret 3 and the aft superstructure?
Post Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2024 12:03 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Did the Cleveland class hangers have an elevator to move planes to the main deck?
Post Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2024 12:01 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
David Sandifer wrote:
Thank you, Dick! I was lost between the LOWER, WIDER (your words) Mk3 and the HIGHER, TALLER (my words) Mk3. I've found two other CLs, Honolulu CL48 (24OCT1942) with the LOWER, WIDER shape and Helena CL51 (27JUN1942) with the HIGHER, TALLER shape, and both are identified simply as having Mk3 radar antenna. There must be another way to describe the differences besides the Mk1 eyeball.


Hey David -- Friedman's "Naval Radars" discusses the Mark 3 "FC" radar in some detail. The different antenna types were different mods of the system. The "higher-taller" type is described as the Mark 3 Mod.1 (BuOrd designation "FC"), and the "lower-wider" type is described as Mark 3 Mod.2 (same BuOrd designation FC). I assume these different antennas probably have antenna type designations that could be found with enough research. The differences in performance between the two are not discussed. Cheers
Post Posted: Sat Mar 16, 2024 2:56 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
There are a number of minor details that differentiate Cleveland from Mobile. But the biggest one to watch for is the supporting structure for the forward quad 40MM mounts. Cleveland commissioned without any quads (she had 6 twins) and reported to the Pacific that way. Her twins forward were high up in the superstructure. The next pair of ships, Columbia and Montpelier, replaced the high twins with quad 40MM, but these were on a box shaped structure which rested on the original single 20MM projecting structure. All subsequent sisters had a rounded structure that went from the main deck all the way up to the base of the mount. When Cleveland refitted with the quads late in the war, her forward quads were on a structure similar to the after quads on most of the class, with the rounded structure going only down to the O-1 level. To convert Cleveland to Mobile, that difference will have to be addressed.

That structure can be seen on Denver here: https://www.navsource.org/archives/04/058/0405820.jpg Note that Denver was the only ship of the class to have the after quad 40MM at the O-1 level. All others had them at the O-2 level, like the forward quads.
Post Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2024 10:48 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Hi all,
I have been researching to do a build of the Very Fire, 1/350, USS Cleveland kit as the USS Mobile CL-63.
After reading the 24 pages of info here, looking thru Navsource, and looking at USS Mobile's cruise book that a 1944ish build can be done with few modifications to the kit.
I know radars and masts need modifications.
I am also looking for a picture inside of the hanger looking forward. I have one showing the aft bulkhead and a view from inside USS Honolulu' hanger. It would be nice to add a representation of the hanger to the build.
I think I wouldn't need to add the 40mm twins in the stern tub as they seem very late war add to Mobile.

If I did a 1943 fit, it looks like she had
2 x quad 40mm on the fwd SS.
4 x twin 40mm. 2 on aft SS and 2 on main deck midships.
I would need to build the 20mm gallery midships on the O-1 lvl. 3 x 20mm in long tub and 1 20mm on end of fwd SS.
Plus 2 bow, 2 behind turret 2 3 on aft SS, 2 fwd of the #3 turret and 2 on her stern. 13 total 20mm mounts.
Am I close?
Thank you.
Post Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2024 8:38 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Thank you, Dick! I was lost between the LOWER, WIDER (your words) Mk3 and the HIGHER, TALLER (my words) Mk3. I've found two other CLs, Honolulu CL48 (24OCT1942) with the LOWER, WIDER shape and Helena CL51 (27JUN1942) with the HIGHER, TALLER shape, and both are identified simply as having Mk3 radar antenna. There must be another way to describe the differences besides the Mk1 eyeball.
Post Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 11:46 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
Cleveland's MK-34's carried MK-3 (FC) radar, the lower, wider version, until late 1943/early 1944, when she got MK-8 on the forward MK-34 only. (The MK-8 was possibly removed from Denver before she sailed for the West coast for repairs. Columbia also got a MK-8, forward only, at about the same time.)
Post Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 3:41 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
What are the radar antennae on the two Mk34 FCDs of an Operation Torch NOV1942 USS Cleveland? (Might have missed it in the previous 23 pages)
Post Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2024 2:52 am
  Post subject:  Re: Calling all USS Cleveland class (CL) fans  Reply with quote
SCB-74 was the upgrade to the 3-in/50 RFG mounts replacing the 40-mm mounts. Only one Cleveland class got this mod, USS MANCHESTER (CL-83). Both of the FARGO sub-class were decommissioned in 1949-50, prior to the Korean War.
Post Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2023 6:00 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


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