Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
I'm sorry, I don't have an accurate date for that photo other than to say summer-fall, 1941. Similar photos with aircraft in the same colors were taken aboard in early October, 1941 (Doyle, pg. 97) so maybe that photo was part of the same group of photos taken at the same time. Therefore, best guess: early October, 1941.
Sara completed the refit that added the large Oerlikon platform on the funnel and the widening of her flight deck at the bow on 28 April 1941 at Bremerton, Washington. Sometime in late October or early November, she entered Puget Sound Navy Yard where her AA defenses were improved. It is not clear exactly what changed during that refit. That work was complete by 2 December 1941 and she sortied to San Diego to pick up her air group. She arrived at San Diego on 7 December 1941. She sortied for Pearl Harbor the next day.
In January, 1942, Sara was struck by a submarine-launched torpedo. Initial repairs were conducted at Pearl Harbor where her 8" turrets were removed and used as part of coastal defenses there where they served in that role until 1948. She received four 5"/38 Mk.32 mounts in their place. She then went on to Puget Sound for permanent repairs and extensive modifications which lasted from February to May 1942. It was at Puget Sound her funnel was cut down to a lower height, her island significantly modified, she gained Mk.37 directors, her hull was blistered, and her flight deck extended aft, among other mods. Sistership Lexington did not survive long enough to receive similar mods, unfortunately.
Below is a well-know photo of sistership Lexington. Note that the large Oerlikon platform on Lexington's funnel is positioned much higher on the funnel than the platform on Saratoga's funnel. This means that to build an accurate Saratoga 1941 model, a Lexington 1941 model kit's funnel is not a good match.
Hope this helps.
Attachments: |
CV-2 1941.10 g416362.jpg [ 110.76 KiB | Viewed 20535 times ]
|
I'm sorry, I don't have an accurate date for that photo other than to say summer-fall, 1941. Similar photos with aircraft in the same colors were taken aboard in early October, 1941 (Doyle, pg. 97) so maybe that photo was part of the same group of photos taken at the same time. Therefore, best guess: early October, 1941.
[i]Sara[/i] completed the refit that added the large Oerlikon platform on the funnel and the widening of her flight deck at the bow on 28 April 1941 at Bremerton, Washington. Sometime in late October or early November, she entered Puget Sound Navy Yard where her AA defenses were improved. It is not clear exactly what changed during that refit. That work was complete by 2 December 1941 and she sortied to San Diego to pick up her air group. She arrived at San Diego on 7 December 1941. She sortied for Pearl Harbor the next day.
In January, 1942, [i]Sara[/i] was struck by a submarine-launched torpedo. Initial repairs were conducted at Pearl Harbor where her 8" turrets were removed and used as part of coastal defenses there where they served in that role until 1948. She received four 5"/38 Mk.32 mounts in their place. She then went on to Puget Sound for permanent repairs and extensive modifications which lasted from February to May 1942. It was at Puget Sound her funnel was cut down to a lower height, her island significantly modified, she gained Mk.37 directors, her hull was blistered, and her flight deck extended aft, among other mods. Sistership [i]Lexington[/i] did not survive long enough to receive similar mods, unfortunately.
Below is a well-know photo of sistership [i]Lexington[/i]. Note that the large Oerlikon platform on [i]Lexington[/i]'s funnel is positioned much higher on the funnel than the platform on [i]Saratoga[/i]'s funnel. This means that to build an accurate [i]Saratoga[/i] 1941 model, a [i]Lexington[/i] 1941 model kit's funnel is not a good match.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2023 10:31 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Thank you so much!
Do you have a date on the 1st pic?
Thanks,
Akos
Thank you so much!
Do you have a date on the 1st pic?
Thanks,
Akos
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2023 9:13 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2023 10:46 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
The conversation in this thread got me hooked, and I was wondering what pictures were provided for Model Monkey by Dick J to draw the late 1941 funnel version of SARA. Would it be possible to share those?
Thank you very much!
Akos Gergely
The conversation in this thread got me hooked, and I was wondering what pictures were provided for Model Monkey by Dick J to draw the late 1941 funnel version of SARA. Would it be possible to share those?
Thank you very much!
Akos Gergely
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2023 2:16 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Most likely a Mk 44 director: https://www.navsource.org/archives/01/57mk.htm
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2023 12:03 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
can anyone identify this object? Photo was taken in 1942
can anyone identify this object? Photo was taken in 1942
[url=https://ibb.co/0QXv89Z][img]https://i.ibb.co/GFJNBMk/image.png[/img][/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2023 6:12 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Pretty late to this thread, but Friedman's US Carriers book noted the fact that by '43/'44, Sara was badly overweight. So much so that the armoured belt was a foot below the waterline despite the blisters, and stability could be critically endangered by as little as one or two near-miss bombs that opened the hull near the waterline. The ship reported displacement as high as 52,500 tons battle ready, of which which BuShips was skeptical. However, even at 48,000+ tons on a nominal design displacement of 36,000 tons, things were clearly not good. BuShips recommended that the CO very carefully manage the voids in the torpedo protection system to avoid critical stability problems in the event of almost any hull damage at all.
In view of this I'd say that even though the keel-to-flight-deck distance would likely not have changed, the waterline-to-flight-deck distance undoubtedly shrank from commissioning to early war to final refits.
Pretty late to this thread, but Friedman's US Carriers book noted the fact that by '43/'44, Sara was badly overweight. So much so that the armoured belt was a foot below the waterline despite the blisters, and stability could be critically endangered by as little as one or two near-miss bombs that opened the hull near the waterline. The ship reported displacement as high as 52,500 tons battle ready, of which which BuShips was skeptical. However, even at 48,000+ tons on a nominal design displacement of 36,000 tons, things were clearly not good. BuShips recommended that the CO very carefully manage the voids in the torpedo protection system to avoid critical stability problems in the event of almost any hull damage at all.
In view of this I'd say that even though the keel-to-flight-deck distance would likely not have changed, the waterline-to-flight-deck distance undoubtedly shrank from commissioning to early war to final refits.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:27 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
A still of Sara April '41.
A still of Sara April '41. [url=https://postimg.cc/z3Hx9zYC][img]https://i.postimg.cc/VsD20v7V/Screen-Shot-2022-02-11-at-9-34-47-PM.png[/img][/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2022 9:42 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
I shall stop calling it the armoured belt then, since that isn't actually visible. But in any case that's the blister I'm using as a reference point, which sits well above the waterline as designed but seems mostly submerged in WWII service. I'm satisfied now that this was the case and that what the plans booklet calls "emergency draught" may have been actually quite common.
I shall stop calling it the armoured belt then, since that isn't actually visible. But in any case that's the blister I'm using as a reference point, which sits well above the waterline as designed but seems mostly submerged in WWII service. I'm satisfied now that this was the case and that what the plans booklet calls "emergency draught" may have been actually quite common.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:15 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
ModelMonkey wrote: Perhaps this drawing will help. This is Saratoga, port side, after her 1942 refit. Notice that a small blister has been added above the original rounded blister. The armor belt is hidden behind the new blister. This is a popular misconception. The waterline blister was there on both sisters from commissioning, and they had a matching one to starboard. Sara's small starboard blister was removed in 1942 (unnecessary and counter-productive weight) when the larger blister was fitted.
[quote="ModelMonkey"]Perhaps this drawing will help. This is [i]Saratoga[/i], port side, after her 1942 refit. Notice that a small blister has been added above the original rounded blister. The armor belt is hidden behind the new blister.[/quote] This is a popular misconception. The waterline blister was there on both sisters from commissioning, and they had a matching one to starboard. Sara's small starboard blister was removed in 1942 (unnecessary and counter-productive weight) when the larger blister was fitted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 2:46 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Perhaps this drawing will help. This is Saratoga, port side, after her 1942 refit. Notice that a small blister has been added above the original rounded blister. The armor belt is hidden behind the new blister.
Attachments: |
Frame 112.jpg [ 1.74 MiB | Viewed 56126 times ]
|
Perhaps this drawing will help. This is [i]Saratoga[/i], port side, after her 1942 refit. Notice that a small blister has been added above the original rounded blister. The armor belt is hidden behind the new blister.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 6:26 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Sorry, 1/700.
Sorry, 1/700.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:00 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Exactly. So the ship is routinely sitting at emergency waterline by 1944 if not earlier. If that's the case due to weight creep then that's fine and everything adds up, but in that case maybe it shouldn't be called "emergency" Incidentally, this makes the Tamiya kit correct despite some initial suspicions I had that the hull was not tall enough. It also means that for a theoretical mating of a donor kit lower hull on design draught with a Tamiya upper hull on emergency, about 2mm extra thickness would need to be added at the waterline.
Exactly. So the ship is routinely sitting at emergency waterline by 1944 if not earlier. If that's the case due to weight creep then that's fine and everything adds up, but in that case maybe it shouldn't be called "emergency" :big_grin:
Incidentally, this makes the Tamiya kit correct despite some initial suspicions I had that the hull was not tall enough. It also means that for a theoretical mating of a donor kit lower hull on design draught with a Tamiya upper hull on emergency, about 2mm extra thickness would need to be added at the waterline.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 4:13 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
I mean the port side, I'm aware of the assymetry. Compare Page 3 of the plans and how much belt is above the nominal waterline to e.g. these: https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020314e.jpghttps://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020398.jpgUsing the most left cross-section on page 18, I'd say the waterline based on those pictures is roughly at the level of the 3rd deck (roof of machinery space), so a draught of over 32 feet.
I mean the port side, I'm aware of the assymetry. Compare Page 3 of the plans and how much belt is above the nominal waterline to e.g. these:
https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020314e.jpg https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020398.jpg
Using the most left cross-section on page 18, I'd say the waterline based on those pictures is roughly at the level of the 3rd deck (roof of machinery space), so a draught of over 32 feet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:55 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Thank you! The reason I wanted this by the way is to check the accuracy of various kits and the possibility of using the lower hull from e.g. a Trumpeter or Meng Lexington on a Tamiya waterline Saratoga.
One thing doesn't add up for me though. In pictures of Saratoga in WWII (and actually, even in the 1930s), often you can only barely see the top of the armoured belt above the water. In some cases with the ship at lighter load, you can see the black boot stripe is painted over the armoured belt except for the chamfer right at the top. The "design draught" of about 28 feet as drawn on those general arrangement plans is much lower on the ship than this, with a decent height of armoured belt visible. This makes me think this draught was only achieved on trials, or exists purely to declare treaty displacement and the ships quickly sat lower than this. Trumpeter use this value for the upper/lower hull split on their kits but it makes them look too tall when built waterline.
Now, scaling off those plans, for the armour belt to be almost completely below the waterline as in pictures, Saratoga would need to exceed the 32 foot "emergency draught" stated on the general plans booklet.
What am I missing?
Thank you! The reason I wanted this by the way is to check the accuracy of various kits and the possibility of using the lower hull from e.g. a Trumpeter or Meng Lexington on a Tamiya waterline Saratoga.
One thing doesn't add up for me though. In pictures of Saratoga in WWII (and actually, even in the 1930s), often you can only barely see the top of the armoured belt above the water. In some cases with the ship at lighter load, you can see the black boot stripe is painted over the armoured belt except for the chamfer right at the top. The "design draught" of about 28 feet as drawn on those general arrangement plans is much lower on the ship than this, with a decent height of armoured belt visible. This makes me think this draught was only achieved on trials, or exists purely to declare treaty displacement and the ships quickly sat lower than this. Trumpeter use this value for the upper/lower hull split on their kits but it makes them look too tall when built waterline.
Now, scaling off those plans, for the armour belt to be almost completely below the waterline as in pictures, Saratoga would need to exceed the 32 foot "emergency draught" stated on the general plans booklet.
What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 6:34 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
What is the total depth of Saratoga's hull, keel to flight deck? How much did her draugh change with her WWII refits?
Specifically, I would like to know draught and corresponding freeboard to the flight deck in 1942 and 1944 configurations.
What is the total depth of Saratoga's hull, keel to flight deck? How much did her draugh change with her WWII refits?
Specifically, I would like to know draught and corresponding freeboard to the flight deck in 1942 and 1944 configurations.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:46 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Great detail shots of Saratoga - bristling with 40mm guns - arriving in San Francisco in September 1945. https://youtu.be/QDkeNbIOioA
Great detail shots of Saratoga - bristling with 40mm guns - arriving in San Francisco in September 1945.
[url]https://youtu.be/QDkeNbIOioA[/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:15 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
SQUADRON 12 BOMBS NAURU; PLANES TAKE OFF USS SARATOGA FOR TARAWA RAID https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75938#.X94m4BKWAgg.linkYou'll have to download the video to watch. The photographer sucked - lots of the footage is out of focus - but at the end, some interesting shots of her bow cutting through the sea, where you can see the paint worn away from the wave action.
SQUADRON 12 BOMBS NAURU; PLANES TAKE OFF USS SARATOGA FOR TARAWA RAID
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75938#.X94m4BKWAgg.link
You'll have to download the video to watch. The photographer sucked - lots of the footage is out of focus - but at the end, some interesting shots of her bow cutting through the sea, where you can see the paint worn away from the wave action.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2020 11:26 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
Who can help? What is this on 5/38 gun?
Attachments: |
CV-3.jpg [ 288.05 KiB | Viewed 15223 times ]
|
Who can help? What is this on 5/38 gun?
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:40 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: Calling all USS Saratoga CV-3 fans |
|
|
MartinJQuinn wrote: From Navsource: [/quote] Thanks Who can help with landing lights? Plans of Saratoga 1944 indicates the presence of landing lights. They are not on plans of 1945. But I don't find the landing lights in the photos from may 1942 to 1944. Were they even in 1944?
Attachments: |
Landing Lights.jpg [ 52.19 KiB | Viewed 15406 times ]
|
[quote="MartinJQuinn"][/quote] From Navsource: [/quote]
Thanks
Who can help with landing lights? Plans of Saratoga 1944 indicates the presence of landing lights. They are not on plans of 1945. But I don't find the landing lights in the photos from may 1942 to 1944. Were they even in 1944?
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2020 6:45 am |
|
|
|