The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 8:07 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 339 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 3688
Location: Bonn
My model, which should depict her at the time of the Doolittle Raid, has
4 x 28 mm quads (two on the upper bridge deck level, two next to the main mast)
12 x 20 mm single (four in front of the bridge, two on the upper bridge level forward, two on starboard instead of a boat, two on the rear superstructure)

The bridge was modified compared to the original fit to add the 28 mm and 20 mm guns.

Nachville (1/700)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:06 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 302
Location: Austin
Friedman's "Naval Firepower" mentions that "Unfortunately 6in / 47 fusing proved defective, most shells fired in these battles being duds," in ch10 of the book ("The US Navy at War"). Unfortunately I only have an e-reader copy and can't reference the physical page number. So far I have not been able to locate any other information about the 6" shells having defective fusing except for this one passage. Certainly an interesting observation and would love to know more about it...

edit: Also, I had a question earlier on in the thread and think it got buried so want to ask again:

Quote:
I have a "general" question for you guys regarding the 26' motor whaleboats. On several plans (especially of DDs), I've seen plan views of the whaleboats hanging outboard of the ship from the davits labeled as "at sea position", and hanging inboard as "harbor position". Based on photos I can't really discern a pattern for how the whaleboats would be carried and have seen no documentation on standard practice. Would the 26' MWB be swung inboard while in harbor or at anchor and then swung outboard while steaming at sea? Photos of various ships underway show both methods.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 5003
My Dad's 1943 BJM states on page 575 that: At sea, the boats best adapted as lifeboats, one on each side, should always be ready for lowering. The specific navy reg referenced is not identified.

Tom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3825
Ian,

Tom is right. But, from observation of many photos, USN ships operating in situations like the Guadalcanal Campaign and on up the "chain" of islands, ships, particularly the destroyers, kept boats onboard. I'm pretty sure this was done because of the cases of sudden attacks by submarines or unseen destroyers firing torpedoes or aircraft. The need to rapidly be able to aid a stricken ship or forbid, need to abandon ship made it prudent. Now then the boat could be "ready" for lowering while swung inboard. The boats are just not soundingly stowed (aka tied down hard), just ready so all that the crew needs to do is man and swing the boat outboard.

Operational conditions dictated what a ship's CO or an unit command directed. Looking at photos during the Carrier Strike Task Groups, the escorts normally kept the small boats inboard so they didn't get lost at sea from storm conditions or resupply mishaps. I read enough "reports" in BuShips files where the beancounters wanted to know what happened to their PREVIOUS boat since they had a request in to be issued a new one. The previous boat was issued to them and needed to be accounted for. The real problem was when a boat was lost off on destroyer and recovered by another ship. :whistle:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 5:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:47 pm
Posts: 208
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest
Ian Roberts wrote:
Friedman's "Naval Firepower" mentions that "Unfortunately 6in / 47 fusing proved defective, most shells fired in these battles being duds," in ch10 of the book ("The US Navy at War"). Unfortunately I only have an e-reader copy and can't reference the physical page number. So far I have not been able to locate any other information about the 6" shells having defective fusing except for this one passage. Certainly an interesting observation and would love to know more about it...

edit: Also, I had a question earlier on in the thread and think it got buried so want to ask again:

Quote:
I have a "general" question for you guys regarding the 26' motor whaleboats. On several plans (especially of DDs), I've seen plan views of the whaleboats hanging outboard of the ship from the davits labeled as "at sea position", and hanging inboard as "harbor position". Based on photos I can't really discern a pattern for how the whaleboats would be carried and have seen no documentation on standard practice. Would the 26' MWB be swung inboard while in harbor or at anchor and then swung outboard while steaming at sea? Photos of various ships underway show both methods.


Yeah one passage is not something to hang your hat on, Me, I haven't referenced it anywhere, not heard anything of the sort.... Friedman goes on for over two pages in his cruiser book on the improved 6" AP shell and I've read other sources that mention it....

As far as the boat davits, yes, it was either way, generally in port the davits were run in whether the boat was present or not.... and yes there are numerous references to the boat davits being run out at sea... My reading experiences leads me to say it was 50/50 as far as which way was used..... There is no hard and fast rule on it that I am aware of.... You wouldn't be wrong mounting them either way.....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 99
Location: Huntington Beach, CA 92646-5446
Egilman, your 23FEB post prompted me to look at the 1/350 ISW Nashville that has rested in my stash for a decade.

Waybackwhen, I joined the hull halves, cleaned and primed all over and bottom painted her, made an oak base and put her on lamp risers. There she remains. Nashville's uninspiring 1944 Ms 31/21d had me looking for a way to backdate her to a Ms 12 mod APR1942 timeframe. Modifying the needed round bridge levels and back-dating weapons systems halted my progress. Even the inspiration of John Leyland's Doolttle Raid 1/700 diorama in the 2012 #333 gallery didn't draw me back.

The dawn of the Dragon 1/350 Benson/Gleaves and Gearing DDs stole my attention.

Now you pose familiar questions. Find the solutions. I'll be following your future Nashville efforts and hoping to regain the spark.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:47 pm
Posts: 208
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest
David, I've just started my research, I've found what should be three definitive shots of what she looked like on the raid.... Dated April 1st 1942 in San Francisco Bay just getting underway.... Very clean shots with a neutral grey foggy background... Unfortunately they are all port side shots... Still looking for a decent pic of her starboard side..... I also have a single shot of her stern when she was at Kiska bombarding the Japanese garrison there in August... I'll assume she was the same port and starboard as far as armament for now as a preliminary condition and she does have only her port boat crane... (part of the King Board antiaircraft modifications she received in 1940) I haven't gotten around to optimizing them yet for posting here but I will post their numbers....

San Francisco Bay, April 1st 1942... (the date she left with the Hornet on the raid)

19-N-28991, 19-N-28992 & 19-N-28993

Shelling off Kiska Alaska August 8th, 1942...

NH 50768

Put any of them numbers into google and it should pull them up on the NNHC site and you can download the high res TIFF versions.....

Still building the USS Gwin on April 18th 1942 so this is just doing research right now in preparation for the future....

You should bring her down and finish her....

I forgot about this one that Rick posted a decent sized crop of, 80-G-324222, dated April 18th 1942 showing her starboard side....

Attachment:
zCL43x20_18Apr42.lr.jpg
zCL43x20_18Apr42.lr.jpg [ 179.73 KiB | Viewed 3143 times ]


The camo pattern isn't an issue.....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:01 am
Posts: 1643
Location: Corvallis, Oregon, USA
I do recall reading about defective fuzes on the 6"/47 rounds. It was in discussions of the gun explosion on the USS Newport News CA-148 in 1972 caused by premature detonation. The 6" and 8" projectiles used the same fuzes.

The report noted that as manufacturing ramped up during WWII the quality of the fuzes went down. There were several premature detonations that destroyed guns during firing range tests of the projectiles and some duds reported in the fleet. I don't recall any guns exploding during WWII - at least on ships that survived combat.

I thought I had a copy of that report but I can't find it right now.

I was especially interested in the premature detonations because the OK City was the last 6"/47 ship in the fleet and we pumped over 30,000 6" bullets into the jungle in Vietnam. I think most of it was WWII vintage ammunition.

****

Tom,

What is the book you are reading about naval action in the Solomons?

I have an excellent book "Night Work" by Fletcher Pratt (Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1946). It is about naval action in the Solomons and Tip Merrill's Task Force 39 that was made up of the first four Cleveland class cruisers (Cleveland, Columbia , Montpelier and Denver). It also describes action by Brooklyn class Nashville, St. Louis and Helena.

Phil

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 10:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 5003
Phil:

I have been on a reading binge lately. The current book I am reading is "Blazing Star, Setting Sun" by JR Cox. Published 2020. Covers the overall Solomons campaign. I probably have most of the books of this campaign in my library. Also just finished Ian Toll's third book in his Pacific War trilogy. A few things I hadn't previously known! During my years flying around the US and later the world, I always hit the used book stores, where one could find many interesting volumes!

Tom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:47 pm
Posts: 208
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest
DrPR wrote:
I do recall reading about defective fuzes on the 6"/47 rounds. It was in discussions of the gun explosion on the USS Newport News CA-148 in 1972 caused by premature detonation. The 6" and 8" projectiles used the same fuzes.

The report noted that as manufacturing ramped up during WWII the quality of the fuzes went down. There were several premature detonations that destroyed guns during firing range tests of the projectiles and some duds reported in the fleet. I don't recall any guns exploding during WWII - at least on ships that survived combat.

I thought I had a copy of that report but I can't find it right now.

I was especially interested in the premature detonations because the OK City was the last 6"/47 ship in the fleet and we pumped over 30,000 6" bullets into the jungle in Vietnam. I think most of it was WWII vintage ammunition.

****
Phil


I believe the rate of misfires for the 6"/47 was down around .05% Could be wrong though it's been several decades since I researched in that area.... My brain is saying the 5"/38-51's were even better than that.... Gun explosions from misfires were not considered a serious issue as far as weapon reliability went....(although it did happen occasionally and was a serious issue when it did)

Such things were always a consideration with heavy artillery, since it's invention.......

Most of the heavy weaponry expended in Vietnam, (artillery and iron bombs) were WWII/Korean War vintage....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 2:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3825
I have found in files at NARA, that there were quite a few "hang-fires" with 5-in/38 guns during heavy rapid firing of the weapon during combat. USS NICHOLAS and USS CHEVALIER are ones fairly well documented by photos. I can't remember the destroyer's name right now, but a SUMNER/GEARING had a hang-fire I believe off Korea.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 3:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:47 pm
Posts: 208
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest
Well, she came in the mail today....

Attachment:
DCP_2920.JPG
DCP_2920.JPG [ 182.6 KiB | Viewed 3082 times ]


ISW's USS Nashville.... Not a bad looking model, the forward superstructure decks are separate which makes it easier to modify them into the proper configuration... (or rebuild them if necessary)

Lots of teeny tiny parts, some of them broken, most not..... but she is a good looking model.... My first fully resin ship....

Moving forward......

EG


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Egilman wrote:
Well, she came in the mail today....

Attachment:
DCP_2920.JPG


ISW's USS Nashville.... Not a bad looking model, the forward superstructure decks are separate which makes it easier to modify them into the proper configuration... (or rebuild them if necessary)

Lots of teeny tiny parts, some of them broken, most not..... but she is a good looking model.... My first fully resin ship....

Moving forward......

EG

Just received up the same kit, and also plan to do a pre-war Brooklyn.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Just found a 1/350 Brooklyn superstructure on Shapeways. Hopefully I can use it to backdate.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2021 1:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Milwaukie, OR
My Shapeways order with the Brooklyn superstructure shipped today.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Shapeways Brooklyn parts arrived today.
Image
Image
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1949
Which specific ship, and what year are you planning? It does make a big difference. As built, all 7 original Brooklyn's had the early version of the MK-34 director, without a rangefinder. It had similarities to the later ones installed on the St Louis class and later ships, but had only spotting glasses barely protruding from the sides of the director. Vincennes (CA-44) had the same version of the MK-34. They had this version as late as the start of the war in Europe, and Vincennes's director was unchanged when she was lost. However, by November of 1941, the directors on the Brooklyn's had been modified, but it was not as simple as shoving in a rangefinder. So, when the RF was added, the shape of the housing totally changed to the type shown on your 3D printed parts. Also, the MK-33 directors varied. CL-40 through 43 had the open-topped MK-33's, while CL-46 through 48 had the fully-enclosed type. By the end of the war, all had the fully enclosed type except CL-42 and CL-48, which had upgraded to MK-37's.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Dick J wrote:
Which specific ship, and what year are you planning? It does make a big difference. As built, all 7 original Brooklyn's had the early version of the MK-34 director, without a rangefinder. It had similarities to the later ones installed on the St Louis class and later ships, but had only spotting glasses barely protruding from the sides of the director. Vincennes (CA-44) had the same version of the MK-34. They had this version as late as the start of the war in Europe, and Vincennes's director was unchanged when she was lost. However, by November of 1941, the directors on the Brooklyn's had been modified, but it was not as simple as shoving in a rangefinder. So, when the RF was added, the shape of the housing totally changed to the type shown on your 3D printed parts. Also, the MK-33 directors varied. CL-40 through 43 had the open-topped MK-33's, while CL-46 through 48 had the fully-enclosed type. By the end of the war, all had the fully enclosed type except CL-42 and CL-48, which had upgraded to MK-37's.

The original plan was Helena, but too much surgery, and those oddball twin 5" turrets, so Phoenix , 1939. I have the Kraken Vincennes Mk34s on order.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 254
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Dick J, are these the correct directors?
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 12:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1949
They do match the photos of the ships as-built.
https://www.navsource.org/archives/04/041/0404137.jpg
https://www.navsource.org/archives/04/048/0404803.jpg
https://www.navsource.org/archives/04/040/0404010.jpg
So you should be good to go. How hard will it be to remove the other directors from the printed superstructure?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 339 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Vlad and 51 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