The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 9:50 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 918 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 ... 46  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 2:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Mike -
Thanks. I figured the port line I show in the picture kinda looked right because of the size and downward slope. I see it on pictures of ENT and YKTN as well. There are many more roller doors to dodge on the port side so that's why I figured they routed it higher up, sooner on that side. Either way, it has to go on the model since it's pretty visible. You can do your part and make my job easier by telling me I don't need to search any further.
This scratchbuilding stuff is getting old. Can't wait to get to the flight deck.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Here's an additional change to HORNET I've noted as I work on the hangar deck sides. In this publicity photo, note that the forward boat crane is still in position as are both searchlights on the stack. Note the structure 'hung' from the flight deck level and running from just aft the the stack to just about even with the mainmast vertical. Its forward end is just a tad forward of the forwardmost boiler air intake.
Attachment:
HNT sailors waving.jpg
HNT sailors waving.jpg [ 118.34 KiB | Viewed 7153 times ]

This was the clearest photo I had on hand, but the forward end of the structure is clear enough.
On this photo, the forward boat crane is gone, the forward searchlight on the stack (among other things), and so is 16' of the structure (now with life rafts attached) as seen here:
Attachment:
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_g.jpg
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_g.jpg [ 71.65 KiB | Viewed 7153 times ]

I checked my MD Silver plans to see if there might be a reasonable explanation. Since the plans represent HORNET 'as built', the room on the forward end of the structure is there and is labelled: 'boat crane machinery room' and does sit almost immediately below the crane's location on the flight deck level. Note in the second picture the structure ends aft of the forward two boiler air intakes. I measured the plans and the room is 16' long - didn't pull that one from the rectal locker.
I looked at ENT and her structure seemed to remain full length through '42 at least, but her boat crane had not been removed. After her shipyard work in '43 the crane is gone and it looks as if the structure is somewhat shorter but I can't quite tell.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 7:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John W. wrote:
Here's an additional change to HORNET I've noted as I work on the hangar deck sides. In this publicity photo, note that the forward boat crane is still in position as are both searchlights on the stack. Note the structure 'hung' from the flight deck level and running from just aft the the stack to just about even with the mainmast vertical. Its forward end is just a tad forward of the forwardmost boiler air intake.
Attachment:
HNT sailors waving.jpg

This was the clearest photo I had on hand, but the forward end of the structure is clear enough.
On this photo, the forward boat crane is gone, the forward searchlight on the stack (among other things), and so is 16' of the structure (now with life rafts attached) as seen here:
Attachment:
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_g.jpg

I checked my MD Silver plans to see if there might be a reasonable explanation. Since the plans represent HORNET 'as built', the room on the forward end of the structure is there and is labelled: 'boat crane machinery room' and does sit almost immediately below the crane's location on the flight deck level. Note in the second picture the structure ends aft of the forward two boiler air intakes. I measured the plans and the room is 16' long - didn't pull that one from the rectal locker.
I looked at ENT and her structure seemed to remain full length through '42 at least, but her boat crane had not been removed. After her shipyard work in '43 the crane is gone and it looks as if the structure is somewhat shorter but I can't quite tell.


John, you are correct in your observations. Dick J and I had discussed this very feature some time ago. The machinery room for the boat crane was cut back on a 45 degree angle and that rectangular structure that houses several rooms was shortened as a result. Yorktown and Enterprise did not have this structure altered even after the crane was removed. Enterprise kept that crane longest, until her 7/42 work at PHNY, but the underlying structure remained as built. My belief is that this was a weight shaving measure in CV8, as several other little items were shaved. Note the shape of the second tripod platform as built, which matched her sisters, and post 1/42 for example. The saluting cannon platform on the starboard side of the island above where the crane would have been was also cut back. Interestingly, Tamiya captured this difference on their 1/719 scale models of Hornet and Enterprise.

Image

Image

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 9:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Mike -
Thanks as always. Did I miss this earlier on this thread? If so, sorry to repeat.
Just so I'm clear on what you are saying in your reply, was the forward edge of the boat crane machinery room on HORNET cut back at a 45 degree angle? It looks to me as though the room was eliminated altogether leaving a 90 degree corner when viewed from overhead (if it wasn't for the flight deck, of course). I did see this somewhat grainy photo of ENTERPRISE which does look to me as though the corner was beveled (again, in plan view that is)
'ENT Before'
Attachment:
ENT island strbd view 42.jpg
ENT island strbd view 42.jpg [ 104.67 KiB | Viewed 7117 times ]

'After'
Attachment:
ENT stbd island 43.jpg
ENT stbd island 43.jpg [ 155.73 KiB | Viewed 7117 times ]

As with HORNET, the 'before' shows the leading edge of the machinery room essentially even with the mainmast vertical column, the 'after' shows it cut back. In the case of ENT I can convince myself the forward edge is beveled because I don't see any portholes (airports) in the first ten feet or so.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1949
Careful reading too much into those Enterprise photos. The apparent difference is very small, and the "target angle" is not the same. The lower photo is more forward of the beam (note that both trailing legs of the tripod are visible while the portside one is completely wooded in the upper one) which can distort the alignment of the projecting outer bulkhead relative to the more inboard island.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John W. wrote:
Mike -
Thanks as always. Did I miss this earlier on this thread? If so, sorry to repeat.
Just so I'm clear on what you are saying in your reply, was the forward edge of the boat crane machinery room on HORNET cut back at a 45 degree angle? It looks to me as though the room was eliminated altogether leaving a 90 degree corner when viewed from overhead (if it wasn't for the flight deck, of course). I did see this somewhat grainy photo of ENTERPRISE which does look to me as though the corner was beveled (again, in plan view that is)
'ENT Before'
Attachment:
ENT island strbd view 42.jpg

'After'
Attachment:
ENT stbd island 43.jpg

As with HORNET, the 'before' shows the leading edge of the machinery room essentially even with the mainmast vertical column, the 'after' shows it cut back. In the case of ENT I can convince myself the forward edge is beveled because I don't see any portholes (airports) in the first ten feet or so.



John,

Look at the sun lit and shadow portion of the cut away area just in front of the life raft. You will see that 45 degree angle showing as a bright triangle of sunlight here:
Image

BTW, Dick J and I discussed this in private e-mails, so you did not miss it in a post here!! As for the Enterprise photos, note the location of the signal flag lockers. In Hornet's case, the end of the rectangular structure is well aft of a vertical line up to the front end of the locker. In Enterprise, both photos show the rectangular structure ends ahead of the locker. Also note the location of the three intake grills below the rectangular structure. In Hornet, the rectangle is cut back aft of the entire first grill. In early Enterprise, it is in ends in front of the grill and maybe a few feet was cut back in the later CV-6 configuration. I never looked closely at post 10/43 CV-6 in this regards but you may be right, it looks cut back a little bit, but it was just a few feet, not nearly as much as in Hornet. It looks like it was cut, maybe to the first panel of the first intake grill, while Hornet was cut fully aft of both panels of the first intake grill. Got to put a ruler on plans to be sure. I have pre- and post 10/43 plans to compare, soon as I can dig them out.

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
OK, copy all Dick and Mike. I didn't see ENT as being identical, but that's neither here nor there.
I buy most of what you say about the leading edge being beveled. I can't explain the shadow / sun pattern any other way than as the bevel as you say, Mike. BUT! It's actually TWO different bevel angles - halfway it's about, oh, 45 degrees or so, but the second half as it gets close to the vertical bulkhead it's probably more like 30 degrees. (I picked that because in engineering drawing we only used two triangles: a 45 degree equilateral and a 30 / 60 / 90, so I'm sticking to that.)
Seriously, though, look at the photo below carefully and you can see the underside edge of the structure in question at the forward end. It really is two angles and they show pretty clearly, especially in the original photo when it displays larger.
Attachment:
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_e.jpg
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_e.jpg [ 119.75 KiB | Viewed 7104 times ]

I agree the room was removed to save weight. Maybe that portion of the deck still needed support for the AA guns and so they kept part of the structure for that reason. DFK.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John W. wrote:
OK, copy all Dick and Mike. I didn't see ENT as being identical, but that's neither here nor there.
I buy most of what you say about the leading edge being beveled. I can't explain the shadow / sun pattern any other way than as the bevel as you say, Mike. BUT! It's actually TWO different bevel angles - halfway it's about, oh, 45 degrees or so, but the second half as it gets close to the vertical bulkhead it's probably more like 30 degrees. (I picked that because in engineering drawing we only used two triangles: a 45 degree equilateral and a 30 / 60 / 90, so I'm sticking to that.)
Seriously, though, look at the photo below carefully and you can see the underside edge of the structure in question at the forward end. It really is two angles and they show pretty clearly, especially in the original photo when it displays larger.
Attachment:
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_e.jpg

I agree the room was removed to save weight. Maybe that portion of the deck still needed support for the AA guns and so they kept part of the structure for that reason. DFK.


I was interpreting that as a 90 degree for a few feet then the 45 degree angle starting back a bit from the starboard side outer bulkhead of the rectangular structure, but I can see where you might get a short stretch of 30 degree than going to 45 degree. I always viewed it as starting a bit back from the original structure, but your underside read may show a shallow angle before increasing to a more severe one. No plan exists that I am aware of showing the 2/42 modifications, so that photo series is all we have to go on. A bit of faith must get mixed into these situations!

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
Seventy one years ago, on this date, April 18, 1942, eighty brave Americans took off on a near suicide mission from the deck of USS Hornet. Initially viewed as a risky morale boaster, the 20/20 hindsight of history reveals that their mission altered the course of World War II in ways unforeseen at the time. The enemy was so enraged that he threw his fleet into action at Midway, allowing our fleet, lying in ambush, to send four fleet carriers to the bottom. Also, to defend the home islands from further such attacks, the enemy kept 3,000 combat aircraft at home instead of throwing them into the Guadalcanal campaign. That may have been the critical margin of victory. At Midway the US Navy stopped the enemy cold, and in the Solomons campaign, reversed his tide of victory. Of the eighty men who took off that April day, the survivors can be counted now on the fingers of one hand. A salute is in order to the men, and the ship that launched them, for she too, would play a role in both Midway and in the Solomons, where she gave her life to help gain the inevitable victory. Everything that came after, hard fought though it was, was a cleaning up campaign against a foe who refused to admit that he could no longer win. Few capital ships had a life as short as Hornet. Few made as big a difference.
Image

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Mike -
Roger. Looking aft and along the starboard side, I'm planning to use a 30 degree angle for about the first half the divergence, turning outward to a 45 degree angle until the forward edge meets the side of the box structure. As you've beat into my head, I will paint it 5-O. I will mix the paint for that 'new' area to a slightly darker shade to reflect the number of months it is newer than the 5-O already painted on at commissioning. (Just kidding.)
I'm assuming the photo you posted was from the movie unless the organization of the flight deck had broken down badly. Pri-Fly looks like a set fixture.

What is most fascinating about the whole story of the Raid and the aftermath is that it is not the product of a fiction writer's mind. All the twists and turns, narrow misses, and flat luck happened as they did - they were not invented to make a movie riveting. There were certainly several points at which the outcome could have been substantially different - for example, if the picket boat's report mentioned Army bombers on (HORNET's) deck (as if a fisherman would have known, but he could have) the Japanese might have prepared for the strike earlier -they were expecting short-range carrier aircraft.
In this face-paced world, there is still time to read the story and fully appreciate its complexity and drama. I recommend "I Could Never Be So Lucky Again" or "The First Heroes" as two I think do a good job. I haven't read "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" since High School so I don't remember how good it is.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 2:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John W. wrote:
Mike -
Roger. Looking aft and along the starboard side, I'm planning to use a 30 degree angle for about the first half the divergence, turning outward to a 45 degree angle until the forward edge meets the side of the box structure. As you've beat into my head, I will paint it 5-O. I will mix the paint for that 'new' area to a slightly darker shade to reflect the number of months it is newer than the 5-O already painted on at commissioning. (Just kidding.)
I'm assuming the photo you posted was from the movie unless the organization of the flight deck had broken down badly. Pri-Fly looks like a set fixture.

What is most fascinating about the whole story of the Raid and the aftermath is that it is not the product of a fiction writer's mind. All the twists and turns, narrow misses, and flat luck happened as they did - they were not invented to make a movie riveting. There were certainly several points at which the outcome could have been substantially different - for example, if the picket boat's report mentioned Army bombers on (HORNET's) deck (as if a fisherman would have known, but he could have) the Japanese might have prepared for the strike earlier -they were expecting short-range carrier aircraft.
In this face-paced world, there is still time to read the story and fully appreciate its complexity and drama. I recommend "I Could Never Be So Lucky Again" or "The First Heroes" as two I think do a good job. I haven't read "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" since High School so I don't remember how good it is.


John, I was just studying a blowup of that color shot. I think it is way more acute that 30 degrees for the first little section, say maybe 10-15 degrees. I think it is far less than the halfway point where is goes to 45 or so degrees. (Are we going at it from opposite directions? I am looking at it from outer edge of box structure going in. 10-15 degrees oriented against a port/stbd cross-ship beam line for first few feet increasing to about 45 until it hits the hangar bulkhead.)

The shot is a clip from Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo, but I am fairly certain it is the actual "real" footage as they weaved in several real takeoffs into the movie. If you see it running, you'll realize it was not all movie set footage. Pri-fly and flag bridge have the right modifications that the set model did not. It was more "as built." Added key features to note, there is a man in prifly in second window back, and the canvas wind dodger around the roof of prifly, and the angled signal light bar on outer the edge of prifly, all not in the movie set models. It is grainy, but you can also see some camo pattern in prifly structure. Also, note the wet deck reflections next to the island. They may have grained it up to blend with set footage. I must have gone through that movie frame by frame! They did a good job for the time. Some set footage and model work is hard to spot. As for those books, read them all! If you last read TSOT in high school, you might want to get a recent printing. I got a hard cover recent print and it is a More lame spammers, please ignore, the moderators will delete version than the abridged youth oriented version we all read in the school library. Also, Ellen Lawson has added a nice postscript with lots of info in it.

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 8:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Mike - Some must think we're round the bend with some of this discussion. Oh well.
Looking at the last photo I posted, and assuming I could hang on the underside, outer edge of the structure with suction cups (can't believe I saying this) and moving forward from the back end starting under the #3 1.1" mount I go until I reach the forward end of the outside under edge. Looking at the picture, I can see the underside of the forward edge changes direction inward (left) at an angle that looks to be about 45 degrees inward from the edge which was parallel to the ship's centerline. So right now as I follow it I am headed port 045 relative (or 315 relative if you prefer). As I move along that angled outside lower edge a number of feet, I come to the second bend where the angle changes to the right maybe 15 degrees relative to the 45 degree edge I have just been traveling along. So I am now traveling port 030 relative (or 330 relative if you prefer). When this edge joins the vertical bulkhead it makes about a thirty degree further turn (to my right) in joining the bulkhead which brings me back to 000 relative.
Hopefully that either clears it up or confuses it sufficiently that you agree with me to shut me up. The key is the underside edge in the photo just above the most forward boiler air intakes.
I don't have a good photo annotation program to draw an arrow where I mean, unfortunately. I know there's some kind of platform on the angled front edge to which we are referring, but I don't believe it shows from this angle looking upward and forward.

My comment about the picture had to do with a couple of swabbies standing out on the middle of the deck during a launch with no apparent duties - wearing dark blue dixie cups, no less. (Thought the dark blue hats came in later in the war.) Can you say FOD in that wind? I don't recall any film taken from directly aft of the B-25s as or after they took off. Maybe that's the last plane leaving, but it just doesn't look right to me.
I have an eye for details, but as always I defer to your expertise as amply demonstrated before. If you say it's real, then I'll agree you say it's real.
(I'm headed out of town early tomorrow, so if I don't respond to any return posts, that's why. If I'm wrong, I'll own it.)

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John, now I think you are trying to walk me off the plank! What heading are we on? Anyway, I think you are right about a catwalk in front of the angled section. it would be there to allow access to the refueling rig and hoses that are suspended there. See how this blow up works for you.
Image

I went back and re-studied the TSOT screen capture above. Damn! It IS a movie set shot. I compared a photo of Capt. Mitscher standing on the roof of prifly during the takeoffs with that shot. The canvas wind dodger is what gave it away. It went all the way to the end of the railing. In that shot it ends short. Also the pilorus is missing. Plenty of dark blue headgear showing though. Carpenter's rule, measure twice, cut once failed me here. I measured several indicators and still got fooled. The movie guys did a good job of blending it into reality! And they must have had the 2/42 revision plans because the set captures the mods. They had me fooled for 18 hours. I must hold my head in shame, but it is a credit to them.
Image

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 7:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Mike -
The lighting just looked off - just not real enough to me. It's hard to describe.
I agree the headgear is dark, but they look like knit watchcaps (I think that's what my brother called them) that you would pull down over your ears to keep you warm and to keep them from blowing off. The hats on the swabbies in the movie set picture are dixiecups.
Not sure if you are seeing the double angle I'm talking about.
Here's a zoom on the area where I see the double angle.
Attachment:
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_ezoom.jpg
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_ezoom.jpg [ 39.12 KiB | Viewed 6955 times ]

Call up the original on a photo editor and zoom in a bit and see what you think.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 7:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John W. wrote:
Mike -
The lighting just looked off - just not real enough to me. It's hard to describe.
I agree the headgear is dark, but they look like knit watchcaps (I think that's what my brother called them) that you would pull down over your ears to keep you warm and to keep them from blowing off. The hats on the swabbies in the movie set picture are dixiecups.
Not sure if you are seeing the double angle I'm talking about.
Here's a zoom on the area where I see the double angle.
Attachment:
1942_02_28_norfolk_nsy_ezoom.jpg

Call up the original on a photo editor and zoom in a bit and see what you think.



John, I definitely agree about the double angle. There is short stretch moving in from the "box" outer edge that is about 45 degrees, then a run of several feet at about 30 degrees then a longer run up to the bulkhead at a more acute angle of maybe 55 degrees. Three separate angles, ending in front of the first intake grills, where the original structure ran to. It's just that you were describing it from the opposite direction that I was. Wish I could find a better shot of what is in front of it post-mod. I believe that small catwalk may have been left there after the mod. I think these shots are revealing about that catwalk platform:
Image
Image


I thought the first guy behind Mitscher might be wearing a dixie cup, pulled down a bit. These shots though, clearly show blue dixies on the raid:
Image
Image

I found this in my captures file. A shot of tugs moving her around the Cheasapeake:
Image

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 8:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Mike -
Thanks for the additional comments. Roger the dark colored dixie cups. You are now qualified to move on to Final Jeopardy!
I was looking back through my photos for more details when I came across the picture below. It has some very interesting details: HORNET crew (I assume none of the B-25 'ground crew' would have done this) in the mainmast (or is it the foremast?) platforms, and the netting on the catwalk railings (lower right in photo). I have seen the latter represented on drawings but could never seem to pick it out in any photo. The X shaped netting is much thinner than I had thought so that's probably why.
This is obviously not a shot from the movie, but I cannot find it again on the Internet where I know I must have found it in the first place. I want to get a clean copy without my handwritten notations. Anyway, I post it here to add to the discussion.
Attachment:
B-25 Takeoff001.jpg
B-25 Takeoff001.jpg [ 112.54 KiB | Viewed 6874 times ]

This seems to be midway through the launch, and I do remember seeing some B-25s take off while the sun was out (shadows under the plane) and others not. The clouds in the photo (and the sun angle) seem to explain that.
As a side note, the width of the perforated metal on the edge of the flight deck is still not clear to me. The blueprints seem to show it at about 12 - 18", but when I use the width of a man's shoulders as 22" or so, I get the width at closer to 24". Is the actual width speced-out anywhere? If I missed it on the MD Silver plans, I'd appreciate someone pointing out where. Thanks for the help.

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:15 am
Posts: 476
Location: Brooklyn NY USA
John, that is actually a nice shot, one I have not seen before. Uncensored too, note all radars showing. I don't think the metal deck edge is as wide as 24 inches. Other shots around the deck seem to be about 18 inches based on Mark 1 eyeball SWAG. It is listed on the CV-5 plan as a waterway, so it is no doubt a scupper. Based on the scale bar on the drawing, it is about 18 inches wide. Less than 2 feet for sure. Some takeoff shots I have show crewmen laying on deck on top of it, and it seems about 18 inches there.

_________________
Mike
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Yes, it is an interesting shot for which I wish I remembered the source. Obviously bootlegged off the ship and not through the censors. I figured you should know where it came from - sigh.

I'm 5-9 - probably close to the guys in this picture. My wingspan is 18". Just saying that the waterway looks noticeably wider than the shoulders of any of the guys when comparing the waterway and the guy closest to it at the same point. Yup, they are not standing quite square to the waterway, but it still looks wider than 18" to my eyes.
Attachment:
YKTN 20mm gunners.jpg
YKTN 20mm gunners.jpg [ 30.79 KiB | Viewed 6826 times ]

The waterway is made of the same perf metal as the catwalks and island exterior decks. I haven't figured out a good way to cut P/E perf plate that narrow and parallel. Yet. I've taught myself plenty of stuff I never thought I'd have to, or for that matter - ever thought I'd want to.
See, 24" is easier to scratch than 18" - it's 0.017" wider. Hmm. Skip it. Never mind.

_________________
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 . . .)


Last edited by John W. on Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 10448
Location: EG48
John W. wrote:
Obviously bootlegged off the ship and not through the censors.


No, not obviously. Only the photos that were to be released to the public were censored. There are many, many photos in the archives of photos that were not cleared for release until they were declassified after the war with all of the details still in view. Some of the photos that were stored and later turned over were censored because they were copies that could be used publicly if desired, but most of the files in, say, Bureau of Ships or the theater commands were never censored. Just as a FYI....

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 518
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Tracy -
Thanks. Too quick to assume I guess. Now if we could just find the photos someone might have taken from the same place on LEX at Coral Sea . . . .

_________________
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 . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 918 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 ... 46  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

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