The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Fri May 25, 2018 11:12 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 312 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2016 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6273
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
Juneau camo discussion now has it's own thread: viewtopic.php?f=69&t=164112

ALL discussion of Juneau's camo to take place there only.

Thank you

_________________
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: Sat Dec 31, 2016 2:51 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3094
I came across an interesting photo of USS OAKLAND "dated 4 December 1943" which provides some lessons about the dates found on the mounting card captions of 80-G photos at NARA and the wear and tear on the paint of the ATLANTA class cruisers in general. See first attached image.

This photo really got my attention because I had scanned sometime ago an aerial photo of Pearl Harbor anchorage dated 13 December 1943. In that photo was USS OAKLAND (CL-95) based on the fact that none of her ATLANTA "2nd group" sisters had yet to arrive at Pearl Harbor. And when they did arrive, they had been painted in the newer dazzle camo.

First lesson is about dates on 80-G card captions. I always treat the dates as suspect and generally at most the real date "maybe" somewhere earlier than the one shown on the caption. USS OAKLAND's DANFS entries state that she first arrived at Pearl Harbor on 4 November 1943. Shortly afterwards she departed Pearl and was assigned to TG 50.3 as part of Operation Galvanic - Gilbert Island Landings in November 1943. The first actions took place on 19 November with USN airstrikes. On 20 November the Japanese attacked and OAKLAND was credited with downing four aircraft in her first combat action. On 26 November OAKLAND was reassigned to TG 50.1 and again was involved in a Japanese airstrike on 4 December 1943. So I don't know if this photo was taken on 20 November or 4 December 1943? Plus it is strange that the photo was credited to a photographer onboard USS MINNEAPOLIS (CA-36), when as far as I can tell she wasn't part of the same Task Groups. However, CruDiv mates NEW ORLEANS and SAN FRANCISCO assigned to TF 52 were attached to TG 50.1 on 26 November. So maybe MINNEAPOLIS was as well and the references just missed it or since MINNEAPOLIS was the unit Flag, she collected the photos. At any rate OAKLAND's DANFS entry goes on to state that TG 50.1 returned to Pearl Harbor and arrived on 9 December 1943. But MINNEAPOLIS (along with NEW ORLEANS and SAN FRANCISCO) also returned to Pearl harbor on 9 December 1943.

This brings me to the Pearl Harbor image dated 13 December 1943. See second and third attached images showing the general anchorage area and a cropped view of OAKLAND. I have ID a few of the easier cruisers in the view. USS OAKLAND being the only ATLANTA 2nd group unit in view, USS MINNEAPOLIS (CA-36) because of her unique camo, and USS BOSTON (CA-69) because her sister USS BALTIMORE was elsewhere and didn't return to Pearl until 30 December and BOSTON had just arrived at Pearl Harbor on 6 December 1943. I strongly suspect that the two cruisers tied up with MINNEAPOLIS are SAN FRANCISCO and NEW ORLEANS. It appears from ships present and the dates that ere there, that the 13 December date is probably correct within a couple of days anyway.

Second lesson is about the wear and tear of the paint on the hull of ATLANTA class cruisers. Note in the 4 December (or 20 November) 1943 photo that OAKLAND is showing a lot of "light color" along the waterline that likely isn't all due to bow wave and wake. Go to the 13 December 1943 at Pearl Harbor where OAKLAND can be seen with the same sort of pattern. Close exam of the image shows small boats/rafts along the side of the ship and it appears that primer has been applied to much of the worn area to be repainted.

Contrast this wear to what OAKLAND looked like on 29 October 1943 when she departed MINY. See the 4th image. In this photo it appears that a fresh coat of paint has been applied to the hull in the area of the knuckle from the waterline to the deck. So after only a little over one month of hard sailing, OAKLAND has seen her hull worn enough by the ocean due to the hull design to wear off the camo paint ABOVE the black boot strip. Similar wear to applied paint has been seen in other ATLANTA class cruiser photos and the high bow wave being deflected up to the knuckle can be seen on them when moving at high speed.


Image

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 03, 2017 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6273
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
USS Atlanta with Hornet, date unknown. The card says "Battle of Midway", but I thought Atlanta was with Yorktown (this could have been after Yorky was sunk). Photo from the National Archives, via Roger Torgeson.
Attachment:
File comment: Atlanta and Hornet 80G-74486
CL-51withCV8_80-G-74486.jpg
CL-51withCV8_80-G-74486.jpg [ 749.41 KiB | Viewed 2339 times ]

Atlanta with Saratoga during the Guadalcanal landings. Photo from the National Archives, again via Roger Torgeson.
Attachment:
File comment: Atlanta and Saratoga 80G-74487
CL-51withCV3_80-G-74487.jpg
CL-51withCV3_80-G-74487.jpg [ 450.79 KiB | Viewed 2339 times ]

_________________
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: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3094
Martin,

What is interesting about this pair of photos, is that the first one is one of several photos of USS ATLANTA taking during the Battle of Midway with USS HORNET and the other one was taken a few months later. But, both of these photos were dated the same month on the 80-G mounting card caption and were obviously in different camo schemes. So what were the dates for these photos?

When I came across these two photos and scanned them, I knew there was no way they both were taken in August 1942. I recognized that the first one was similar to two other images I had scanned of ATLANTA alongside USS HORNET (and taken by USS ENTERPRISE) at the Battle of Midway. I had figured out that USS ATLANTA had repainted her hull with 5N in June-July 1942 at Pearl Harbor, so the photo dated to after July 1942. But, when was the second photo taken?

It took some research to track down when USS SARATOGA and USS ATLANTA and USS ENTERPRISE were all at the same place at the same time. It was tricky because SARATOGA was in a different Task Force than ENTERPRISE and ATLANTA around the time of the Guadalcanal Landings. Eventually from War Diaries and other accounts, I narrowed down the date to more or less 21 August 1942 just before ENTERPRISE was torpedoed and when SARATOGA was torpedoed a few days afterwards and while the two Task Forces joined for a short period.

I posted these same images back in August of last year. Here is the post and some additional info.

... viewtopic.php?f=69&t=164112&start=300#p698924 ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6273
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
Rick E Davis wrote:
I posted these same images back in August of last year. Here is the post and some additional info.

... viewtopic.php?f=69&t=164112&start=300#p698924 ...


Thanks Rick. I admit to not being motivated enough to go through the whole thread to see if one of the other had been posted. I knew one looked familiar. Now I know why.

_________________
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: Sun Feb 05, 2017 3:01 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9511
Location: EG48
Down time is precious and mod time takes away from mod-eling time, so you have my thanks for the good amount that you do! :thumbs_up_1:

_________________
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 Feb 20, 2017 7:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 7:06 am
Posts: 2003
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Hi all,

I aim to build Dragon's Premium 1/700 USS Juneau 1942 kit as her sister USS Atlanta right about the time of the Battle of Midway.

I was looking through Glenn Arnold's book Warship Perspectives: Atlanta Class Cruisers of World War Two, and from what I can find, I can't seem to see any differences in the hull, superstructure or in her AA fit, if any.

The only main difference seems to be within their camo schemes, which are clearly represented in the book.

So would it be reasonable to assume that since both sisters came from the same shipyard, they were structurally identical, so therefore the only thing that needs changing in the kit is the pennant/hull number?

I can use spare hull decals from a Midship Models destroyer kit.

If anyone thinks I missed something, please let me know.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:05 pm 
Online

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3094
It is true that the two sisters built at Federal are more or less the same, except for their radar suites. ATLANTA had the SC-1 radar on the foremast and never had a SG radar installed. JUNEAU had her SC-1 radar relocated to the mainmast and a SG radar installed on the foremast.

The problem is that the old Skywave ATLANTA class cruiser kits have a number of errors. Perhaps the worst is the oversized armor belt that Battleships would be jealous of. :smallsmile:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 7:06 am
Posts: 2003
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Rick E Davis wrote:
It is true that the two sisters built at Federal are more or less the same, except for their radar suites. ATLANTA had the SC-1 radar on the foremast and never had a SG radar installed. JUNEAU had her SC-1 radar relocated to the mainmast and a SG radar installed on the foremast.

The problem is that the old Skywave ATLANTA class cruiser kits have a number of errors. Perhaps the worst is the oversized armor belt that Battleships would be jealous of. :smallsmile:


Thanks for pointing out the radar. I'll just have to switch the positions of the two then as you pointed out above.

I will be using the Dragon Premium Juneau kit, so there shouldn't be the same problems as the Skywave Atlanta kit.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 10378
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
Quote:
I will be using the Dragon Premium Juneau kit, so there shouldn't be the same problems as the Skywave Atlanta kit.


It's the same plastic for the hull and superstructure.

_________________
Yo dawg, I heard you like PE, so I put some PE in your PE so you can use PE on your PE.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 12:09 am 
Online

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3094
I don't have (at least I don't think I do, I'm sometimes surprised to find a kit in my stash that I forgot about getting) the DML Premium JUNEAU kit, but I believe the only "major" upgrades provided over the original Skywave kit, is adding replacement 5-in mounts and a lower hull.

Check past posts in this thread for comments about the Pitroad/Dragon Skywave ATLANTA class kits and errors needing fixed, if you are so inclined to fix them.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 7:06 am
Posts: 2003
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Timmy C wrote:
Quote:
I will be using the Dragon Premium Juneau kit, so there shouldn't be the same problems as the Skywave Atlanta kit.


It's the same plastic for the hull and superstructure.


Ouch. When checking the review for the Dragon/DML Juneau, I should have checked our site's review for the San Diego as well, which said that Dragon bought their molds and supposedly improved them. D'OH! :doh_1:

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 10:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:20 am
Posts: 68
Location: Lompoc, California
Was the uss san diego cl-53 measure 32/24D 5-L and dull black? Have a San Diego I've done years ago in the 5-L 5-O combos actual design is right though.

_________________
Complete:
1/700 USS California BB-44
1/700 USS South Dakota BB-57

Under construction:
1/700 USS Sigourney DD-643 (70%)
1/700 USS Montana BB-67 (20% complete)

Waiting Drydock
ROS o.s (Samek) 1/700 USS Guam CB-2


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 11:03 am 
Online

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9511
Location: EG48
Yes.

_________________
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 Jun 02, 2017 9:51 am 
Online

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3094
Just as an aside. It turns out that USS SAN JUAN returned to Ms 21 camo by July 1945.

This image is from the "Arthur Boyer's USS RESCUE (AH-18) Photo Album" on Navsource ... http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/12/pdf/1218b.pdf ...

The photo was most likely taken on 21 July 1945 while transferring injured sailors to USS RESCUE according to USS RESCUE's War Diary. The only other ATLANTA class cruiser with wing twin 5-in mounts, USS SAN DIEGO (CL-53), remained in dazzle camo until returning to the West Coast a couple of months after the war was over. The unknown destroyer could be USS HALE (DD-642), also noted to have transferred injured that day and whose photo is elsewhere in the album.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2017 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:20 am
Posts: 94
No help to you modellers, but a damn fine painting just the same! USS Atlanta, Friday 13th, November, 1942 during "The Barroom Brawl".


Attachments:
USS Atlanta Friday 13th Nov 42.jpg
USS Atlanta Friday 13th Nov 42.jpg [ 276.72 KiB | Viewed 992 times ]

_________________
We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant. HMS Repulse. Dec. 8 1941
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 4:22 pm
Posts: 260
Location: NAZARETH PA
For anyone interested in trying to model Juneau after the 11/13/42 battle and before the fatal torpedo hit, you may want to read the survivor story at this site----

http://www.ussatlanta.com/stories/Juneasstoryfay.htm

This man was at Bat 2 which I am guessing was the platform between the aft stack and the aft director. His battle station was a 50 cal and his text seems to suggest the presence of at least one more 50, not clear whether on the same side or not. Also not explicit which side of the ship he was on but since he said he could see the torpedo hole it seems safe to assume it was the port side.

His description of damage from gun fire has more detail than any book I have read on the subject. He relates a large shell hit to the crew mess hall/battle dressing station, which per a plan I received from a CLAA crewman was in the area below the main deck below mount 6 and ran forward to the center of the 1.1 gun forward of the 5" loader practice units. If anyone wants a copy of the plans feel free to email me direct.

_________________
FRED BRANYAN
fredb1048@aol.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:20 am
Posts: 94
Colosseum wrote:
Posting these here as requested by Fred Branyan (who was instrumental in getting the camouflage detailing correct for SAN DIEGO and SAN JUAN). Also a big thanks to everyone in this thread for providing the excellent reference material. Here's the results of my efforts, obviously any commentary/suggestions are appreciated:


If I may ask, what happened to the images in the above post?

Is it just me or are they no longer there?

_________________
We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant. HMS Repulse. Dec. 8 1941


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 155
Location: Austin, TX
They were linked from a subdomain of our Shipbucket website that's no longer active. Here they are, reposted with correct links:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:08 pm 
Colosseum wrote:
They were linked from a subdomain of our Shipbucket website that's no longer active. Here they are..................


WOW, cool! THANKS!!!


Top
  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 312 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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

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