The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Tue Mar 19, 2024 12:27 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 999 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 10:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:20 pm
Posts: 11
Thanks Martin!!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 10443
Location: EG48
MartinJQuinn wrote:
The hangar bulkheads (walls) would be white.


I'm going to provisionally disagree with you but I don't have the time to do it in great detail tonight. Evidence suggest silver - I"ll try and write more tomorrow.

_________________
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: Mon Jul 30, 2018 9:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 8151
Location: New Jersey
Tracy White wrote:
MartinJQuinn wrote:
The hangar bulkheads (walls) would be white.


I'm going to provisionally disagree with you but I don't have the time to do it in great detail tonight. Evidence suggest silver - I"ll try and write more tomorrow.

"Conventional wisdom" says they were white. How's that for a clarification?

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 10443
Location: EG48
OK, we have discussed this before with regards to the Yorktown class - example here. We have no documented proof and my attempts to find it at archives have failed so far (I'm probably going about it wrong as I've been targeting aircraft carrier records but the photo at the top of the post I linked to is CA-30 Houston so I probably need to find which file code "hangar space paint" would be under. Hopefully on the next trip?

_________________
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: Sun Aug 05, 2018 11:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:14 am
Posts: 238
Location: SE Michigan
Jeff Sharp wrote:
This is a photo of USS Portland and USS Lexington on 12/7/41. The crews had just been informed of the attack on Pearl. Portland is preparing her scout planes for launch. Does anyone know exactly what Lexington is doing in this pic?
Image


My guess as an engineering officer of the nuclear fleet is she’s blowing soot to improve boiler efficiency. I believe this was done daily at sea in non nuclear steam plants. I know in the utility industry it’s normally done at night to keep the public from seeing it. If your now at war and don’t know when you may be attacked, I’d want to have my plant at maximum capacity.

_________________
Our CO prior to flying to the boomer: “Our goals on this patrol is to shoot missiles and torpedoes.”
Junior Nuke Officer (me) : “Captain, don’t we really want to be like Monty Python and ‘Not be seen’?”
CO “You seem to be missing the big picture”
“Oh”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:12 am 
Actually All walls inside the ship are just primer covered. When the ship goes to sea from the yards they would strip all the paint off the walls inside due to fire hazard but leave the out side camo paint on. It tells about this in the new Saratoga CV -3 book I have. Also a piece of damaged Bridge wing they found in the 60's at Mare Island from the Minneapolis damaged in the Solomons that has Ocean Grey on the outside with the paint stripped on the inside.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:14 am
Posts: 238
Location: SE Michigan
The paint removal may not have been immediate as it was a war time measure. But a lot changed after the first year of war for the US Navy. There were losses attributed to various fires, and Atlanta’s loss was attributed to linoleum and paint I believe, I could be wrong since I read the reports long ago when I was DCA.

_________________
Our CO prior to flying to the boomer: “Our goals on this patrol is to shoot missiles and torpedoes.”
Junior Nuke Officer (me) : “Captain, don’t we really want to be like Monty Python and ‘Not be seen’?”
CO “You seem to be missing the big picture”
“Oh”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 10443
Location: EG48
A lot came out of the attack on Pearl Harbor. There was already a "Strip ship" list that had been defined pre-war, but it didn't include removing all paint from what I've seen. Otherwise it would have been done as operating tempo allowed, and we know that carriers were pretty busy the first year of the war.....

_________________
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: Fri Nov 23, 2018 10:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:40 pm
Posts: 539
Trying to figure out how the forward part of the ship was in regard to the area where the 1.1 sponson meets the flight deck extensions. At what frame number did it end? The Booklet of General Plans is in my opinion not very clear in this area and has me shaking my head as it appears to stop at frame 5 when looking at the main deck plan. I have looked at the wreck photos but I can't make anything out from the pics what RV petrel released.


Attachments:
starboard 20mm and AA gun platform, profile.jpg
starboard 20mm and AA gun platform, profile.jpg [ 59.83 KiB | Viewed 5779 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1948
Jon C Ryckert wrote:
Trying to figure out how the forward part of the ship was in regard to the area where the 1.1 sponson meets the flight deck extensions. At what frame number did it end? The Booklet of General Plans is in my opinion not very clear in this area and has me shaking my head as it appears to stop at frame 5 when looking at the main deck plan. I have looked at the wreck photos but I can't make anything out from the pics what RV petrel released.

Welcome to the club on that one. The sponsons for the forward 3"/1.1" mounts are poorly documented. And the wreck photos did not look far enough down toward the hull attachment point to clear things up. Also, the drawing you posted has quite a few "issues", one of which is that the 3"/1.1" platform was slightly lower than the one for the attached .50 cal MG's, and that is not depicted that way. But that is visible in the photos. It has been frustrating trying to make sense of it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 5:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 953
Came across some color footage of USS Lexington at Pearl Harbor in 1942. Enjoy.

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 4184
those 2 pictures were taken pre march 30 1942 according to this link. http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/02a.htm


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 953
Agreed. I have no idea if these are real color film or colorized but still pretty cool to look at.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1948
Too bad they didn't have a clearer shot of the bow. It might have helped answer Jon C Ryckert's (and my) question posted last month. Still some nice captures! What was the title of the video they came from?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 953
Here is a link to the film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xPeILtIcGQ


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:30 am
Posts: 46
Location: United Kingdom
I haven't been here for awhile, so simply checked in to see what's new. The pictures from the dive of the wreck have certainly answered some hoary old unfathomables (e.g. 1.1" gun tubs square ended or round).

My particular interest is gunnery control and all the paraphernalia that goes with it. So I have been endlessly puzzled to see models produced (from the Trumpeter 1/700 and 1/350 kits) where the control position (formerly for the 8-inch battery) below the foretop has been completely omitted. Easy assumption to make of course, given it's difficult to see in the available photos taken after the final refit. However, I've always believed it was retained because in the starboard view of the ship trimmed by the bow at Coral Sea you can just discern the sloping hood above the folded down weather shields for the director. It's the small lump below the foretop containing the 5-inch directors and rangefinders/altimeters.

Now we have a close-up photo of the wreck looking down on the roof of the control position. And there we have the hexagonal aperture in the roof, the folded down wind shields (blown backwards), and inside is the pedestal for the director. Maybe the director was demolished. Maybe it had been removed. Page 37 of Warship Pictorial 33 features a small drawing top left close to the spine of the book which is a plan of the control position. The caption reads: TEMP GUN DIRECTOR INSTALLATION SEE REF. R. Ref R reads FOUNDATION FOR MK16 MOD2 GUN DIRECTOR (TEMP DIR INSTALLATION). The Mk16 was a secondary battery director in capital ships and the main battery director for light cruisers and destroyers. It was originally used in Omaha class cruisers, Colorado class battleships and in rebuilt battleships prior to the New Mexico class. This information from page 193 Naval Firepower by Norman Friedman. Lexington was originally fitted with a Mk 18 director in this position for 8-inch fire control (together with another on the lower platform abaft the funnel). So the conclusion is that when the 8-inch armament was removed, the Mk 18 director was replaced (intended temporarily) with a Mk 16 director for low-angle control of the 5-inch battery. The Mk 16 was for surface fire control only, not anti-aircraft (high angle) fire.

The plan is also annotated ANT [Antenna] PEDESTAL POSITION TRAIN DRIVE UNITS ABOVE REF. P. Ref P states TEMP COMPOSITE FC RADAR ANT ELEV. AND TRAIN MOUNT. So the control position would have been used for training and elevating the fire control radar on the forward top of the control position, whether or not the director was in place.

_________________
Regards, Chris

"When there is nothing but ambiguity and hard evidence is lacking, trust your judgement, instincts and hunches."
Diana McLain Smith


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:48 pm 
lvsquarerigger wrote:
I took the high res photo of Lex after the first torpedo attack and cropped and lightened it. With the higher exposure you can see the front of the flag bridge cabin and the walkway around the front. That was how I had done mine but after the pics here I started to change it so the cabin went all the way forward. Now it seems I had done it right and now have to do it over again. Imagine that? :smallsmile:

James


I down loaded this photo on windows 10 and zoomed in on the flag bridge area and it turned out real good but I do not know how to post it. Can you do the same and post?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:26 am
Posts: 398
Location: Albuquerque, NM
This is the cropped and lightened photo.

James


Attachments:
NH 76560a.jpg
NH 76560a.jpg [ 180.65 KiB | Viewed 5399 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2018 8:40 am 
lvsquarerigger wrote:
This is the cropped and lightened photo.

James

This photo I zoomed in on on my computer even closer and it showed something in the design. Can you take this photo and zoom in closer to the flag bridge and post it here?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1948
The photo I find most useful for the flag bridge config is the James Noblin photo on page 37 of this thread. Some have claimed that the mod was incomplete when this photo was taken, and so does not show the actual final layout. The problem with that notion is that the photo shows no scaffolding or any other indication of ongoing work, and it was dated only one day before she set sail for the Coral Sea. So I believe that photo really does show the final bridge config.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 999 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 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