The Ship Model Forum

Are you able to post a pic or two of your stand? With the templates?

_________________
http://www.USS-Silversides.com

John,

Did your carved hull stop at the main (hanger) deck? Also, I am trying to picture the frame you made. I assume the templetes had the opening at the top and the hull would be lowered into the frame. Almost like a mold would be shaped, but with just the section frames in place. Is that correct?

These photos should answer both questions. You can see the donor resin BWN hull clearly in the first photo. If I were carving a new hull (which I would do in basswood as I've said) I would still carve the hull , gun galleries, and foredeck all as one piece as you see here.
In the second photo, you may notice that I made a secong set of profile templates in the midbody which did not go all the way to the centerline. I did this to enable me to carve the side (vertical part) first, then used the full profile to get the underside inboard of the turn of the bilge. It was easier to do it that way because of the complex curves involved.

Sixman - I used the Webb Warships plan - which used 21 stations plus some intermediate stations and the bow and stern - and not the 39 +/- stations on the drawing you referenced yesterday.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

Now that what I call great work. I really like what you did with the stand and templats. I had some trouble picturing what you did but the pic put everything together. If you some how put your templat in a package with directions on how to make the stand you could sell a few to us "Hornet crazies".

_________________
http://www.USS-Silversides.com

Thanks. Well, as I always say: A picture saves a thousand words. I should have posted them last night, but I wasn't sure there was much interest in what I did.
The board is easy to make. I can tell you for sure, it is worth the time to make it even though it might not seem so in the beginning. I will decline to produce these simply because it would be time away from getting HORNET and other projects further down the road. I bought the BWN kit in 1995 or so, so you can see this project has been long in coming to fruition. Still, the hull correction portion is almost complete. So I am almost where I would have been soon after opening the box if either kit was right in the first place. Sigh. A good set of plans is a godsend. AND a curse. As you may have seen from the photos Mike Sills posted, the hull correction is not the end of it . . . .
But your idea of the templates in a package has merit - perhaps someone with a laser / cutter rig could produce them in quantity. I'm not sure how many relatively crazy folks there would be who'd go to the trouble of doing the hull, though.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

I have a 1/700 Hornet right now and I plan to purchase a 1/350 very soon. I haven't started on my ship yet but I would just hate myself if I didn't try to fix what I could. I'll have to order the plans then I'll probibly bug you about the stand(very sharp) and I also believe that would be time well spent.

_________________
http://www.USS-Silversides.com

I'll be happy to share what I can. Many folks have helped me here - I'll be happy to do the same for others. One thing I can tell you for certain, digging into this information will change how you look at ship models and ship modeling. It's up to you how far you chose to go and what your reasons are for any choices you make. For me, I can really understand a lot more about the ship design process by digging into the ship's lines and plans. Working to get the hull shape right, and holding the model in your hands as it comes closer to the correct shape, gives one a real sense of the ship's personality.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

I can relate to that. Bravo for your work in getting it right. I do agree that the hull COULD have been right from the start. As a CAD guy, it looks like the designer who drew the hull lines over simplified them. Hopefully someday someone will make an accurate kit of this ship.

_________________
Timothy Dike
Owner & Administrator
ModelWarships.com

Tim -
Thanks, and 'Roger That'. In fairness, Trumpeter has done some other really good kits. They got the LEX hull pretty right. I toyed with using it as the basis since it's closer to the right shape than one might imagine. Not too surprising since Bu. C&R designed both not all that many years apart.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

They didn't design a thing. They just copied (with a few modifications to the profile view) an existing very pricey and very wrong resin kit! It was pointed out to them that they needed to correct the hull very early on, but this advice was ignored in their rush to put out a kit. I know, because I'm the one who told them. http://www.modelwarships.com/features/current/hornet_v_yorktown/hornet_yorktown.htm
But you are correct, they could have just as easily got it right if they bothered to do proper research, or listen to the people who did.

_________________
Mike

Looking at the Maryland Silver plan book, the starboard profile shows 7 boats/launches on the starboard side of the island. In the Wiper book, page 41 shows the boats/launches (21 Oct 1941). Pages 48, 49 and 50 show them gone (along with the boat crane). When were the removed?

Sixman, these were removed during Hornet's 1/42 post-shakedown drydocking and yard availability. If she is in original Measure 12, they should be there, if she is in Measure 12 Modified, they would be gone.

_________________
Mike

Interesting tidbit Mike

_________________
If ya lose yer sense of humor...
You've lost everything...

On the Bench:
1/720 Italeri CVN-68 ca 1976/77
1/800 ARii 1/800 CV-59 backdating to 1961 (CVA-59)
1/700Trumpy USS Hornet CV-8 "Doolittle Raiders"

Additional tidbits about this location, the crane machinery room was cut back at a 45 degree angle. This would be the forward end of the boxy structure right under the flight deck alongside the starboard island side. Thus, that structure is a bit shorter than original, and also shorter than CV-5 & CV-6, which were not similarly cut back. In place of the boats, Hornet added four 20MM mounts on the forward end of this area. (Many people have puzzled about a yellowish rectangular something that appears where the boats were in a series of photos dated 2/28/42 at Norfolk. I am fairly sure it is a stack of spare flight deck timber in raw wood color.) After Midway, when she got a fifth 1.1 quad in the reworked bow tub, this location added additional 20mm mounts, and based on her post 7/42 armament roster of 32 20mm's and fact that no other spot could be hiding them, I figure four additional 20's here based on fuzzy photos. I know for sure that one additional one was put in front of the original four, and I'm fairly sure the other three were aft of them with splinter mats added at the railing. CV-5 and CV-6 both had eight 20mm's at this location, so weights and balances would have been approved for the class. Additional tibdits, CV-5 lost her island-side boats and crane here before leaving Norfolk. CV-6 lost her island-side boats at the start of hostilities, but did not offload her boat crane for many months into 1942. (I think she offloaded it in July, if memory serves, but that is off the top of my head. No references right now.)

_________________
Mike

Mike -
Do I remember correctly that this time (1/42) was also when the two 20 mm tubs were added to the round-down at the aft end of the flight deck? Was this also when the optical director atop the pilothouse was removed?

One final question. I know there's been discussion of the color of the paint exposed through the Ms 12 Mod camo. I think the final conclusion (maybe?) was peacetime Navy Gray. Since it is obvious HORNET was commissioned in 5S / 5O in Ms 12, and then painted 5N / 5O / 5H, why wouldn't the lighter color showing be 5S? I do see that even the boottopping is worn away in the bow-on shot in May '42, so maybe the light color is primer. I understand that perhaps the peacetime Gray was gloss, but how would that affect the boottopping's peeling?
Take that Mister Wisdom! anyway, I getting close to painting the hull and I'd like one more burst about the peeling paint to satisfy my curiosity. Thanks.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

John, the 20mm tubs on either corner of the aft ramp were added before she left Norfolk. Whether it was January or February, 42, I can't say for sure. The 1/42 docking photos show her 20mm gallery deck tubs and splinter shields being installed, but the back pair were not there yet. They could have been added right after the photos were taken. They are clearly present on Tokyo Raid photos, so she left the States with them, and stopped nowhere that they might have been installed along the way. The surface 5 inch director was removed during the post shakedown overhaul as well. Maybe someone finally concluded that a carrier would not be exchanging gunfire with a surface combatant! Same rule, if Measure 12 yes it is there, if Measure 12Mod, no, all gone.

I'm not one to guess on whether that light stuff under her camo paint is primer or light gray. It isn't 5-S, way too light. She never sailed in peacetime gray. Whether she wore it at some point while building is subject to interpetation, as I have never seen a color photo to confirm it. Folks who know what a ship wears while building say it was primer. I've got a shot of her fitting out pierside in August 1941, and she is pretty dark and non-glossy by B&W standards. Also, consider that the underlying paint might not have been glossy, but rather, the pounding the ship took in heavy seas on the Tokyo raid would have done in any paint top coat. She was bobbing like a DD in those swells. I've got shots of the whole bulbous forefoot exposed, and another of the entire forward flight deck under water. YMMV!

_________________
Mike

Mike -
Thanks. The photos you refer to from 1/42, are they public domain (i.e. Navsource or the like)? I've seen the series from 11/41, but they are not the ones to which you refer I'm sure since the forward 20 mm tub has railings, not splinter shielding.
The primer color seems most logical for the abraded patches, but I thought the primer would be Red lead.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

John, remember what I said about memory lapses! I think I mixed up the photos from 11/19/41 in my head as the 1/42 yard shots, because those were the ones I was thinking of. She did have a yard period in Jan. 1942 and improvements continued into February 1942. It was during this time that she went into measure 12 Mod, got her full 20mm compliment, which included the four alongside the island and the stern ramp ones, lost her boat crane and boat deck boats, received all her radar and electronic gear and the 2/28/42 shots are her wartime fit. She had no modifications from these shots until July 1942 at PHNY, when she lost her hangar deck catapult and collision guard sponsons, added the CXAM radar to the tripod, moving the SC to the mainmast, got her fifth 1.1 at the bow, added two additional 20mm's which along with the two from the bow, wound up on the former boat deck alongside the island starboard side. Check out the link I first posted here on page 9, back in July 2008:
http://www.maritimequest.com/warship_directory/us_navy_pages/aircraft_carriers/uss_hornet_cv8_page_1.htm. On page 5, second photo, you will see the 20mm aft port quarter gallery deck 20mm's being installed. Note the timbers holding the sections in place during installation. The bow 20mm tub was added here too, but I believe the railings are merely temporary safety railings and these photos only briefly predate the final splinter shield installation (note the guns aren't there yet either!) which may have been added right after these photos were taken. I am a bit suspect of the dates on a few of the October 1941 shots though. Note on the bottom of page 2, the ship is in a uniform overall color and the date is given as 10/13/41. Top of next page 3, she is in original Measure 12, and still dated as 10/13/41. Impossible! Whatever she is wearing in that shot at page 2 bottom is probably what is showing in the shots of the Navy Blue stripped off patches from the heavy seas post Tokyo raid. Don't think it is red lead. Maybe Tracey can tell us if he thinks it is a primer color. It might be overall ocean gray 5-O.

_________________
Mike

Mike -
Thanks again. When I first saw that link posted, I didn't see the multiple pages of HORNET photos. Dumb.
I'd bet 5-O is probably a good guess for the color under the flaking. Might be Red lead under the boottopping too. I'll have to look at that bow-on shot again.

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)

..