The Ship Model Forum

Does anyone have information on stowage of accommodation ladders in 1943. Hank was kind enough to supply me with a picture of forward stowage. I am curious about rear stowage. Also, how many accommodation ladders were on board in1943?

_________________
Scott

Salisbury, NC
USS Iowa BB61 1943 post refit
1:200 Trumpeter w/ Pontos detail up with deck
USS Missouri BB63 1945 1:350

In planning T2-SE-A2 tanker AO-82

Scott,

Edited:
There were four accommodation ladders stowed aboard the ship; two for each side. They were both stowed in the same location on either side of the main deck superstructure. I think there maybe a drawing in the Floating Drydock Plan Book of this and if so, I'll post it Monday when I'm back at work - the book is at my shop. We actually stowed one of ours against the after starboard deckhouse, but this was during Vietnam Era and obviously had changed from earlier times. I think we had two stowed opposite on the port side, one above the other. See photo:

Hope this helps!

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48

Boy! Oh boy oh boy oh boy!

I have found just the railroad-BB61 scene for my operating railroad layout modules!

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/016436.jpg

Wisconsin (BB-64) berthed at Pier 4 East of the Leonardo Pier Complex at the Naval Weapons Station, Earle, NJ, during 10-13 March 1990 to on-load ammunition.

Brian

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

This photo struck me emotionally, thought some here might appreciate seeing it if haven't already. The Wisconsin at Pearl in late 1944 (iirc), tied up outboard of the righted Oklahoma. . . .

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/016413.jpg

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Today I received TFD BB61/1987 1:96 plans. First thing, I scanned the Body view, and when I opened it in Photoshop, I discovered that the vertical center line and horizontal lines aren't square with one another.

Is this a common thing to see on plans?

Unless I'm advised differently, I'll make the vertical centerline true, pop the scan into the CAD program, line up a horizontal line at the bottom of the vertical line and create horizontal lines at the marked heights. (Of course, a couple of the height dimensions aren't readable. . . .)

And, I haven't found a Half-Breadth view, either, which Gene Bodnar in his article, "Scratch Building A Model Ship," says are necessary. However, a half-breadth view is included in Witold Koszela's book of plans for BB61, "The Battleship Iowa." But, then, I'm mixing drawings from two different sources. Sigh. . . .

Welcome to model shipbuilding, I guess?

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Hi Brian,

Yes, unfortunately, this is normal.

As is often the case, original plans drawn with stubby pencils, steel rulers and slide rules on paper, vellum, cloth or other media can and do become distorted over time and sometimes the present form does not scan well. The distortion can occur due to a variety of causes, from poor storage of the original documents, to errors in the original documents, to bad scans or copying of the original documents.

Sometimes, the distortion is not uniform across the drawing. It may be stretched or shrunk a bit here and there, and even different in the X, Y or Z planes.

I sometimes find cases where multi-sheet plans available freely online were scanned in different scales on different sheets!

Obviously, these issues pose a challenge for the modeler that can be difficult to address. The best advice that I can offer you is to carefully look at any graphical scale on the drawing to see if any distortion is visible in the graphical scale. That is a big indicator of horizontal distortion. If no graphical scale is present, study the stationing ruler.


For an Iowa class drawing, the stations are probably 4 feet apart as they are in the example (if spacing is 4 feet, "Station 10" is 40 feet from "Station 0"). Check to see that the station marks in the drawing are uniformly spaced along the entire length of the hull. Then check to see that the stationing measurement matches the stated scale of the drawing. For a 1/96 scale drawing, 40 feet = 127mm on the drawing. For the 1/192 scale example, 40 feet (10 stations) = 63.5mm.

To check for vertical distortion, compare any stated dimensions on the drawings such as deck and platform heights to the graphical scale or stationing ruler. For example, if the drawing explicitly states a platform is 40 feet above the base line, the height of that platform on the drawing should measure 63.5mm above the base line when checked by hand with a ruler, or using a measuring tool in your software.


Usually, the stated dimensions are accurate. But sometimes, even they have errors and you have to check, then double check, then check again.

Once you've identified any distortion, you can decide whether or not any adjustment is needed and how much and where.


For those wanting to know the math needed for station conversion on a 1/192 scale drawing, for example, if you start with 10 stations (40 feet), here you go:

40 feet x (12"/foot) x (25.4mm/inch) divided by 192 = 63.5mm.

For other scales, substitute your desired scale for 192.

Good luck!

_________________
Have fun, Monkey around.™

-Steve L.

Complete catalog: - https://www.model-monkey.com/
Follow Model Monkey® on Facebook: - https://www.facebook.com/modelmonkeybookandhobby

Steve,

Thank you much for your information. I have discovered the local copy shop will scan a 9-foot sheet for $4.95 at 200 dpi, so I'll take the four 1/96 TFD sheets in for scanning. I'm used to using Photoshop to adjust length and height on drawings to account for the problems you mention, so I'll do the same with Iowa.

The Floating Drydock drawings did not come with frame or breadth drawings, which surprises me. And, the sheer/elevation view has 40 markings along the hull, which, I'm guessing, are stations?

I do have frame drawings for BB62 1982 from navsea PDF drawings and also have Iowa mid-section frame and body drawings from "The Battleship Iowa" by Witold Koszela (sharp line drawings on glossy paper).

Maybe I'll have to attempt to incorporate drawings from three sources to get what I need to model Iowa. . . .

(BTW, what drawings are you using to illustrate your points in the above post? Maybe I'm not buying the ones I should be buying.)

Thank you much,

Brian

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Brian wrote:


Bad idea! Use one set of drawings by a single drafter, not drawings from various sources. They will not all have the same hull lines, etc. and the only thing you do is confuse yourself even more. You should be able to get the information needed from one source - i.e. the Plan Book MISSOURI provides full hull lines/body plan etc. I know that several versions of the IOWA hull drawn by different draftsmen have station lines that differ from one to another - why, is anyone's guess.

Keep things simple for yourself!

Hope this helps,

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48

OK. Wish I had not spent $60 on those drawings. So, from whom did you acquire those Missouri drawings? Not clear to me if Steve has them/sells them? Or, perhaps, the Missouri plans come from NavSea the same as the other links in Steve's post. . . .

Thanks,

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Brian,

The MISSOURI Plan Book is available from The Floating Drydock - but is now ONLY available as an E-Book; they don't offer the printed copy of it. However, I would expect that you could have any of the pages printed out as you needed them. Most, if not all the drawings in the book are 1/8" scale so you can calculate what % you would need to enlarge them to equal your model scale. In the back of the book are the hull body plan and side elevations needed to create your hull.

As I mentioned earlier, sticking with one set of plans might be easier as they would have a single set of dimensions, call outs, and other information that may differ from one drafter to another. This would keep things simple. I have a 1:200 scale rendering of NEW JERSEY of the 1967 Booklet of Gen. Plans of her side view taped to the hallway wall and in an adjacent bedroom I have the TFD 1:200 scale copy of the side view and main deck plans taped one above the other on a bedroom wall. This is in my rented mobile home that is my "shop" during the work week. As all drawings are the same scale, I can use them all for reference. The BoGP doesn't show the ship "as buit" but what they "thought" it would look like, but does provide the 4'-0" station marks and other useful info. TFD's drawings provide about a 95% correct view of the ship as it actually went into commission (give or take).

Hope this helps,

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48

Brian,
I will caution you on using the half breath and hull line drawings that are in the back of the Missouri Plan book. I found out the hard way that the height of the bow shown, in those drawings, is actually a 1/4" higher than it should be. It is a 1/192 drawing which should show the height of the bow to be 4 3/8" when in fact it is 4 5/8". I also have the same set plans from the FDD that you do except they are 1/192 and not the 1/96 that you have. Those plans show the bow height to be 4 3/8, which equates to 70' in reality. As I said I found out the hard way after I had already carved the hull. I took the 1/4" off the height, but then the width of the bow was too narrow due the flare of the hull. I ended up having to cut a portion of the bow off and attaching some new wood and then re-carving it.
I emailed Tom at the FDD and the only thing that could have happened is that somewhere along the way, the line drawings got distorted when being reduced from the originals. The distortion is from top to bottom on the drawing, not in the length.
Good luck on your build. I'm about 70% done with mine.

Larry

Hank, as always, very helpful.

Ok, stick with one set of plans, got it, but:

I have a set of plans titled, "Booklet of General Plans Prepared at the New York Naval Shipyard" that is labeled "Finished Plan Taken from Work Examined and Found Correct" dated 19 April 1948 (hmm, April 19, Lexington and Concord, and the turret explosion on Iowa).

These plans (17 drawing plates) include a frame ruler, AP and FP data points, Outboard Profile, Inboard Profile, Bridges, Superstructure Decks, all decks and platforms, the Hold, Third Bottom, Inner Bottom, and 17 frame sections.

But, there is no Breadth or Body drawings.

The $60 TFD USS Iowa drawings do not have a Breadth drawing nor does it have frame drawings.

Witold Koszela's drawings booklet, "The Battleship USS Iowa" has, among others, Hull theoretical lines (?) including a Body drawing, a Breadth drawing, a (mid-ship) Cross section, another body drawing labeled Former sections of the hull (Polish publication, a mis-translation?), superstructure elevation drawings from different eras, and much, much more, including elevation, plan, and body views of both WWII aircraft, the Kingfisher and the Seahawk. All printed with sharp clean lines on glossy paper for $15 (iirc).

But, Koszela's booklet does not include a frame/station ruler or frame drawings other than the mid-section.

So far, I haven't gotten everything I need in one set of plans (if, as a beginner, I understand what it is I need).

At the moment, I don't know what else to do but to attempt to incorporate the 1948 frame/station ruler and the accompanying 17 frame drawings with the Koszela plans in a computer drawing. I can easily set them both to actual dimensions and see if they fit together well.

All of my design work will be done in 2D and 3D CAD/CAM software, so likely I won't have to print out any plans until I get to the outer shell plates.

I might have brain overload at the moment, and I take your warnings about mixing plans from different drafters most seriously. But, I've spent maybe $100 on plans so far, kinda hate to spend more on plans at this point. . . . Hope I'm not cruisin' for a bruisin' (failure, that is).

Brian

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Larry, to me, as a newcomer to model shipbuilding, your story is nightmarish. Boy. . . . I much appreciate this warning.

-Brian

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa

I've just started working on a Tamiya 350 Missouri - planning on doing a September '45 build. Does anyone know if the turrets were equipped with those small crane things at that time (1 or 2 per turret)? It looks like Iowa was, but I'm struggling to see them in photos of Missouri at the surrender ceremony...

_________________
King George V class Battleships in 3D

The crane things your referring to are used in the loading of the shells. I can't say for sure if any turrets had them in place at the surrender ceremony. The pictures I looked at on Navsource did not show any I could see.

_________________
Scott

Salisbury, NC
USS Iowa BB61 1943 post refit
1:200 Trumpeter w/ Pontos detail up with deck
USS Missouri BB63 1945 1:350

In planning T2-SE-A2 tanker AO-82

Martocticvs wrote:


Those "crane things" as you called them are actually davits located on all (3) 16" turret tops to lower 16" projectiles & powder canisters to the powder magazines and projectile handling rooms. The davits are positioned on each turret to specifically operate with a specific scuttle. On either side of each turret in the deck towards the rear of the turret is a flush scuttle where the ammunition is lowered. These davits were in place in WWII and this photo illustrates one of these davits on Turret 2 of USS IOWA (BB-61):

Hope this helps.

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48

They were installed on the Missouri but it looks like they took them off and stowed them when they weren't being used:
http://historylink101.com/ww2_navy/org/ ... /4584.html

Turret 1 has it rigged, turret 2 doesn't
http://navsource.org/archives/01/063/016343.jpg

Turret 1 now doesn't have it rigged
http://navsource.org/archives/01/063/016333b.jpg


Also, it looks like they were stowed during the surrender
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/016313c.jpg

Check this site:
http://historylink101.com/ww2_navy/org/ ... index.html

James

To continue were James left off. Turret 2 had only one davit and was on starboard side, turret 3 had 2 davit one on the port and one on starboard side as seen in the photo. Chad


http://navsource.org/archives/01/063/016312a.jpg

http://navsource.org/archives/01/063/016331.jpg

http://navsource.org/archives/01/063/016300c.jpg

_________________
In war there is no substitute for victory.

USMC-2531 1991-1999
USN ABE2 2013-Present


1/96 Missouri 1944
1/96 Pennsylvania 1941
1/96 Yorktown 1944
1/96 Oscar Austin DDG 79 2013

Very helpful, thanks guys! Definitely looks like they were often not fitted on Missouri, at least not during the latter stages of the war.

_________________
King George V class Battleships in 3D

Its not that they were NOT fitted or used. It is a matter that they were removable for stowage elsewhere when not being used. At sea and not loading ammo, they likely were stowed away.