Calling all Baltimore-class (CA-68) fans

[Haijun watcher]

You should start with the Trumpeter Pittsburg kit for a Chicago conversion - it has the rounded single-crane stern you need.
As for Los Angeles/Chicago comparisons, be aware that while Chicago got fully converted to CG-11, Los Angeles remained a gun cruiser to the end but got a few additional refits - so be careful what time period you're referencing in that book. Up to halfway through the Korean War should be pretty similar.

- Sean F.

Sean,
Thank you for the reply. However, I believe you're referring to another poster when you mentioned the USS Los Angeles, since I have no intention to build her, just Chicago.

Cliff,

Thanks a great deal for all the information you posted, since it's been a great help in clearing things up. While I have yet to read the whole thread, which Baltimore class cruiser kits have you built, if you don't mind my asking?

[SeanF]

Sorry, CCGSailor. It was Bob Dedmon who referenced his Chicago project and having the Los Angeles book. (Two CA-136 projects at the same time... go figure! )

With regard to the stern planking I mentioned earlier, compare:
USS Baltimore: Planking stops just aft of #3 turret muzzles:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/068/0406872.jpg

USS Toledo nearing completion: Planking as with Baltimore. (Note hangar door slid all the way forward - probably why the planking stopped there?)
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/132/0413225.jpg

A later shot of USS Toledo, with planking extended back and along port side of hangar door, but not starboard:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/132/0413229.jpg

USS Helena, with planking back to and to starboard of hangar but not port:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/075/0407527.jpg

USS Los Angeles commissioning, looks like planking stops about the same location as on Toledo and Baltimore (and there's an interesting texture to the steel deck beyond):
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/135/0413521.jpg

USS Los Angeles: Planking stops against front edge of hangar and doesn't extend further to either side:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/135/0413506.jpg

The Toledo and Los Angeles obviously had the planking altered at some point. My best guess is that the ships were probably all completed the same, then altered later. Early 50s, perhaps.

- Sean F.

[DrPR]

The stern openings were for stern lights used for formation steaming and a wake light to illuminate the wake at night.

Most (all?) WWII US cruisers had the paravane chains on the bow. They faired down through a hole in a half-donut shaped stem extension at the bottom of the bow and back up each side of the hull to where the minesweeping paravanes were stowed (near the forward turrets). The paravanes were eliminated on the missile conversions and the holes high on the bow were plated over. The stem extension remained.

Here is an image of the stem extension on a Cleveland class hull:

http://www.okieboat.com/Copyright%20ima ... 0C%205.jpg

Phil

[Bob Dedmon]

thanks everyone...I have the Pittsburg to convert, I have the LA book I figured since it was a numerical leader to Chicago the two I thought I could use the book for reference since I've only seen 2 photos of Chicago before CG-11

[Haijun watcher]

Hello Gary and all,

So essentially, taking note of Gary's post below, I can't use Trumpeter's Baltimore 1943 kit to portray any of her sisters? One has to really acquire either Trumpeter's Baltimore 1944 kit or their Pittsburgh kit, right?

The Trumpeter 1943 BALTIMORE portrays the ship "as commissioned" on April 15, 1943. However, by June she had received additional quad 40mm mounts, including the fantail mount offset to port. She also received some bridge modifications which included a square front bridge top. By the time she deployed in September 1943, BALTIMORE looked more like the 1944 PITTSBURGH kit in the superstructure; therefore, I am using parts from an extra PITTSBURGH in order to represent BALTIMORE as she appeared in September 1943. As can be seen in the Trumpeter 1944 BALTIMORE kit, the July-October 1944 refit made further changes.

I have no idea why Trumpeter made the 1943 kit "as commissioned" instead of "first deployment." She was in that configuration for less than 60 days. The "first deployment" variation is much more interesting from a historical standpoint.

[Haijun watcher]

Cliffy B,

Another question, so the USS Canberra is essentially identical to a 1944 Baltimore? So one would use Trumpy's Baltimore kit to build her?

Just the conclusion I'm drawing from this navsource photo of Canberra and the review of Trumpeter's Baltimore kit showing the differences in various ships' sterns.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Cliffy B]

Yes sir!

The Trumpy Baltimore kits will build into, Baltimore, Boston, Canberra, or Quincy ONLY (CA-68-71).

DO NOT be fooled by the decals in them though as they provide numbers for CA-68-75. The Trumpy New Orleans class kits are notorious for that as well, including numbers for ships that simply can't be built from the kit they're in. Always do your research if accuracy is important.

The Pittsburgh kits will build into the rest of the class (CA-72-75, 130-133, 135, 136).

Again, do your research as no class of ship is entirely 100% identical throughout the class. They were variations in their bridges, superstructures, masts, electronics, and AA guns (quantity and layout, among others. Root through NavSource and if they don't have enough photos ask us. Someone will be able to help

[cliftonra]

I was wondering if the wood deck on the Baltimore class was flush with the bow and stern steel decks or raised proud of them? A look at the Floating Drydock drawings seems to show the that wood deck is proud of the waterways along each side, but there is a line at the bow and stern which seems to cut that off, so as to raise the steel deck up to be flush with the wood. As the Floating Drydock drawings make reference to "waterways" and even sections where the waterways are covered (to allow passage around raised 5" guns and such), I think this establishes that the steel waterway is lower than the adjacent wood deck along each side.
However, there is a photo in the Squadron Heavy Cruiser book 2 (page 17, USS Boston) which seems to show the waterways flush with the bow steel deck which would therefore indicate that the wood deck is slightly above the adjacent steel on all sides.
The various kits (1/350 resin and 1/700) seem to show pretty much everything flush which I think is incorrect.
Is anyone aware of a photo which clearly shows the area where the wood deck meets the waterways AND meets the bow or stern steel section? I have the Ray Bean CD but was unable to distinguish anything specific.
Thank you in advance.
PS I hope this makes sense!
cliftonra
edit- I do NOT have the Ray Bean CD. The only photo reference that I have in my hands is the CD produced by the Floating Drydock. I have been unable to get hold of the Ray Bean CD through normal channels

[DrPR]

Clilfton,

The ships were built with steel decks and then the wood decking was fastened on top of the steel decks. The edge of the wood deck was raised above the steel deck all around.

Around the edges of the wood decks were vertical flat metal bars the height of the wood decking welded to the steel decks. This protected the edges of the wood. The waterways were between this steel edging and the side of the hull.

You can see the edge of the wood deck outboard the 40mm gun tub on the Baltimore in this photo:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/068/0406865.jpg

Here are some more photos showing the forward edge of the wood deck on the Boston:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/069/04010128.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/069/04010129.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/069/04010132.jpg

Wood decking was typically two inches thick. At 1:350 this is about 0.006" or the thickness of two sheets of notebook paper. It would be pretty hard to see this difference in a model.

Phil

[cliftonra]

Thank you Phil, that is exactly what I was looking for.

[task force 58]

Would trumpeter's Pittsburgh be best starting point for a 1954 Macon? Thanks.

[Cliffy B]

A question for those with plans, did the size of the seaplane hangars vary at all with any of the CA-68s? Were they originally larger and then had part turned into Crew Berthing like some of the other cruisers or were they always small? Normal complement was 4 aircraft correct? Best I can tell the hangar doesn't go much farther than the forward end of the hatch. How many aircraft could be stowed inside? Did they leave them on the elevator or was there room to push them to the side?

I'm building one of the 1st four ships with the centerline hatch but any and all info will be appreciated.

I want to depict one of them similar to these photos and have the hatch open and want to be as accurate as possible.

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/069/0406901.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/069/0406937.jpg

-Mike

[Cliffy B]

Anyone know of any more photos of CA-70 in 1945 after her Boston repair/refit following her torpedoing? I've found two but both are shot from a low angle. Looking for topside details if possible. Trying to figure out her 20mm disposition and if they were singles or twins or both.

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/070/0407023.jpg
http://www.usscanberra.com/Images/Album ... 6in_SF.jpg

[HvyCgn9]

G'day All,

Just got an email from Tim at Southern Cross Models as he has just finished the 1/72 scale plug for the Baltimore class Heavy Cruiser. This plug will do the first four ships of the class Baltimore, Boston, Canberra, and Quincy once the mould is made Tim will modify the plug for the round stern hull of the rest of the Baltimores and Oregon City class and make a second mold...

Price for Hull will be $700 AU (which is about $553US at current xchge rate) plus shipping, contact Tim at Southern Cross Models if interested. There are some other really cool hulls available too.....

Here are some pix of the plug.....

Cheers Bruce

PS This hull is 2.85m x 0.30m with about a 12cm draft....

[Crossy]

G'day guys, new to model ship building only done 2 1/700 ships with a third halfway made. Want to make a Leyte gulf USS Boston. I could only get the 1/700 USS Baltimore 43, with the artwork Baltimore 44 wood decks and the flyhawk Baltimore 43/44 detail set. I have limit knowledge of ships. What do I need to do to get her to a Leyte gulf USS Boston? What cam was she wearing? Any good websites that I can use for picture and plans? Any help would be much appreciated

Regards Rodney

[Quaestor]

Just about to start the Trumpy 1/700th Baltimore 1944, in dazzle, and I'm stuck.
The design 16D sheet for this class clearly shows two colors for the decks:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... uisers.jpg
Colors are not specified but I'd suspect deck blue and ocean gray.

Trouble is, if I go to CA-68's Mare Island dockside shots at Navsource, I'm simply not seeing two colors on the deck. A trick of the lighting, maybe. I've been unable to find any other decent overhead shots on the web which might be deciders. In the Gallery you'll see models with all-blue decks and others in two colors.
Were the camo designs followed religiously, or might Baltimore (and others) have been in overall deck blue? Any photos (in particular) or other evidence would be much appreciated. Separate but related, I'm in a similar quandary with San Diego CL-53. I'm wondering if the specs for deck colors, in dazzle schemes, weren't always as rigidly adhered to as those for a ship's vertical surfaces.
TIA

[Navy2000]

Looking for good close up details of these ships. I am building a 1/96 scale radio controlled model. I have many overall shoots more of them would always help. I am mainlylooking for the close up details of all three, but mostly that of CG 11 USS Chicago.

Thanks
Duane

[Cliffy B]

Here ya go!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/63014123@ ... 6675246343

Nice high-res scans too

[drjgilley]

Very nice looking ships here fellas. I am a previous model builder back into the hobby and now am working on a 1/700 USS Baltimore convert to USS Boston CA-69. I wish that I could find a 1/350 Kit for this select class CA-(68-71). The 1/700 are a bit to small for my liking and the 1/350 are more scarce than dinosaurs. Any of you veteran modelers have and insight to 1/350 scale kits in this class? I know they used to exist. I have seen hulls for these, but then you have to find all the fittings, decking, and what-not to complete the build. Really do not have time to do scratch-build either. Nonetheless I will work on the current build.

Thanks,
James

[Timmy C]

Currently, the 350th Baltimore is only available as resin kits. Check out Yankee Modelworks, now owned by Freetime Hobbies. However, Trumpeter has just announced they plan on making a plastic one in their 2016/17 catalog, but don't know when exactly it'll be released.