The Ship Model Forum

by **BB62vet** » Tue Sep 23, 2025 9:56 pm

Jon,

No problem! I hope that info provided what you were looking for.

Hank

by **Jon C Ryckert** » Tue Sep 23, 2025 10:50 am

Sorry for being late in saying thank you for your help BB62vet.

by **BB62vet** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 10:08 pm

Jon,

Well, it seems you may have missed this photo on NavSource showing the vents under construction. Here is a cropped version -

Yes, it would appear that these vents/covers are quite similar to the ones on BB-58. This & the drawing details should provide enough info to make your own parts....

As to Martin's comment re. the two ships built at different yards - this again seems to show that these parts were not common, but items that the individual yards created or engineered themselves due to available materials, etc. Class plans were quite often locally refined/modified as the need arose (I would presume

)

Hope this helps!

by **MartinJQuinn** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 6:29 pm

Jon C Ryckert wrote:FFG-7,

Yes sir, those are very helpful as it appears Indiana and Alabama were very close. Would it be that maybe they were built in the same yard? Thank you very much.

Indiana was built at Newport News. Alabama was built down the river at Norfolk Navy Yard

by **Jon C Ryckert** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 4:25 pm

FFG-7,

Yes sir, those are very helpful as it appears Indiana and Alabama were very close. Would it be that maybe they were built in the same yard? Thank you very much.

by **FFG-7** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 3:26 pm

would this be of any use tho not Alabama?
BB-58 USS Indiana Booklet of General Plans (1943) https://archive.org/details/bb58bogp1943

by **Jon C Ryckert** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 3:07 pm

Thank you BB62vet.

The vent for BB58 looks to be the same as Alabama's. Trumpeter just used the same decks for the Alabama it appears, because the kit vent matches the Mass pic you posted. Would you happen to have profile plans?

by **BB62vet** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 2:54 pm

Jon,

Not sure if this will help, but here are two close-ups of the foredeck area fwd of Turret 1 on both BB-58 and BB-59 showing the plan view of those vents. My guess would be that BB-60 would be like or similar (not sure what the kit depicts) -

If you notice, the difference between the two vent covers is probably due to the individual shipyards designing their own covers perhaps due to available material at the time of construction. I've found this to be true of just about all the warships built of a certain class - no two are alike!

I've been unable at this point to locate any photos that show this area of the foredeck.

Hope this helps!

by **Jon C Ryckert** » Tue Sep 09, 2025 12:01 pm

Would anyone have pictures of the two vents that are attached to the breakwater forward of Alabama's turret one? I have searched the net, and my references just don't have good views. The 1/350 Trumpeter kit is wrong in this area (rear deck vents also)? I visited the ship in 2022, but that area was cordoned off as they were redecking that part of the ship. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Jon

by **Fliger747** » Tue Sep 03, 2024 1:02 pm

What is the scale here?

by **Rick50** » Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:48 pm

My BB 59 3d printed superstructure wood printed deck
SOUTH DAKOTA SUPERSTRUCTURE AND Hull RESIN FROM MOLD

by **Chris Coveney** » Wed Feb 28, 2024 7:38 pm

Also the boat crane aft wasn't fitted to Alabama.

by **Dick J** » Wed Feb 28, 2024 3:46 pm

One thing you need to be aware of when converting an Alabama into a Massachusetts is the spare anchor notch. The South Dakotas were designed with a notch in the deck, port side forward, for a spare anchor. Massachusetts retained hers until her post-war refit, although it was disguised following her '44 refit by having a quad 40MM positioned on top of it. (The visible break in the deck edge remained, however.) Alabama had hers filled in prior to commissioning, although the reinforced deck-edge lip can still be seen a short distance below the forecastle deck.
https://navsource.org/archives/01/059/015934.jpg
https://navsource.org/archives/01/060/016042.jpg
https://navsource.org/archives/01/060/016014.jpg

by **SeanF** » Wed Feb 28, 2024 3:11 pm

pascalemod wrote:What are the key differences for USS Massachusets ca 1942-43 during her African presence to be mindful of compared to late 1945? Radar, AA, location of various tertirary weapons, boats, etc. Im thinking what are the key backdating steps for Trumpeter 1/700 1945 kit.

Right off the bat, you should use their Alabama kit instead as it will start you off much closer to where you want to finish. (Unless you already have the Massachusetts kit and simply must use it). Aside from the AA fit, the mainmast is one of the most notable differences and the 1945 BB-59 kit has the late style.

- Sean F.

by **pascalemod** » Wed Feb 28, 2024 2:54 am

What are the key differences for USS Massachusets ca 1942-43 during her African presence to be mindful of compared to late 1945? Radar, AA, location of various tertirary weapons, boats, etc. Im thinking what are the key backdating steps for Trumpeter 1/700 1945 kit.

by **Mike W** » Fri Nov 10, 2023 5:09 pm

Thanks but I don't have the kit yet, so I can't really compare the plans and the kit.

by **Mike W** » Thu Nov 09, 2023 6:07 pm

I'm thinking of getting the Vee Hobby Indiana but I want to back date it to 1944, when it was painted in it's Ms32 scheme. Can anyone help me with what work would be needed, other than the paint job.

thanks
Mike

by **Fliger747** » Sun Aug 20, 2023 10:06 am

There is a really excellent analysis of the damage to Krishna on line. It is believed that Washington't first salvo that was spotted as short caused several penetrations of the side protective system below the waterline beginning a progressive flooding that probably would have been fatal eventually. It contains a chart showing hit locations etc. Very thorough! It was some years ago I read this excellent article and traveling at the moment don't have a link to it.

Interestingly SODAK's main armor was not penetrated including a hit on her aft barbette.

by **taskforce48** » Sat Aug 19, 2023 10:37 pm

DavidP wrote:doubt it was diving shells that did in the Kirishima but the sheer number of shells that hit that ship, 107 x 5" & 75 x 16" at about 8000 yards/4.69 miles. at that distance, the shells most likely be still horizontal not plunging when hitting the Kirishima.
https://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2022/ ... ssons.html
https://www.quora.com/How-was-USS-Washi ... uadalcanal
http://combinedfleet.com/ships/kongo

Not to take this thread further off topic, but review of this shows there was several critical hits below the waterline which let to her instability. The actual hits were around 20 of 16-inch, ADM lee said they only hit her 8 times, but several of the "misses" would plunge into the side of the Kirishima.
Lundgren Kirishima Damage Analysis

Matt

by **Fliger747** » Wed Aug 16, 2023 4:51 pm

Supposedly the Kentucky and Illinois had their torpedo protection revised for this reason as the commissioned Iowa's mostly duplicated the SODAK system. When Battleships are compared it's usually on the basis of ship vrs ship. Indeed diving shells were a considerable danger, probably responsible for krishima's rapid demise vis. Washington. I have some recollection Prince of Wales had an unexploded 8" shell from Prinz E in her bilge. One of POW's three hits on Bismarck defeated her side protective system by diving under and causing some slow progressive flooding.

The Ship Model Forum

Calling all South Dakota-class (BB-57) fans!

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Calling all South Dakota-class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!

Re: Calling all South Dakota class (BB-57) fans!