The Ship Model Forum

Matt -

I had the kit at one time, was going to build it, then sold it. When I did have it, after looking at lots of archival photos lent to me by the research gang, I felt that the kit was actually a mid-1942 St. Louis, after her March refit but before her refit in November of that same year.

Take it for FWIW. That, and $2.75, will get you on the NYC subway.

Good luck.

_________________
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

This photo might answer some questions.

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/049/0404908.jpg

https://www.history.navy.mil/our-collec ... -3971.html
(Download the high-rez version)

The front of the deck on which the conning tower rests is flush with the front of the air intake vents on the front of the lower superstructure.

OK, so thank you for the high-res version.

It gives me an idea of a LOT of stuff that needs to be hacked OFF of the Midship Models kit, as well as a few things to ADD to the kit (such as the proper shape of the back of the topmost deck with the 1.1" tubs.

But I cannot tell how far down the mast goes. It looks like maybe one level, because when I pull it into photoshop, and send it through a HSV iterator (which shows the image with every possible setting of HSV, Contrast, and such) the shadows below the middle deck of the bridge show no changes. But that isn't "certain," it's just what I get with the information from this scan, which might not be detailed enough.

But looking again at the images of the front of the bridge.... I need to cut the vents off that sit on the front of the bridge, and re-build them (they are really sloppy), and re-build the entire upper deck.

And it looks like I need to shim the Conning Tower deck by about .015" (around 10" to 11" in scale).

But I still can't find anything that shows how the director tubs are attached.

All of the models seem to show a post, which I would really like to see the evidence of, given the hi-res photo.

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

And one other question:

What is on the very aft portion of the superstructure level 01?

That part right below the 20mm tub, and just to the aft of between the 1.1" Tubs on the P/S at the rear of the superstructure?

I can make out what looks to be a solid railing that is almost at the same level as the splinter-shielding around the 1.1" tube in the photo Dick J. posted.....

But in scouring Navsource for both the St. Louis and Helena.... I can't find anything showing what the heck is back there.

MB

Edit: Never mind (sort of). In scrolling through the HSVC settings I managed to see that that is a railing (normal chain railing and stanchions)...

And that it is mostly empty....

Something that looks like a post about 8' tall looks to be at the aft of the superstructure.

But otherwise it is just empty deck (maybe room for 1.1" ammo boxes?).

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

Dick,

Thanks for posting the link to the Navy web site. Last time I looked they hadn't posted any photos for the OK City. Now they have a bunch of high resolution images, including one I have been looking for for years.

Phil

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

Also note the light gray top on turret two, with the twin willow green stripes of CruDiv 6....

I am including a link to the photo I am posting below, because the link allows for a much larger, detailed view of the image.

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/049/0404935.jpg

But what are those things that I have the red and purple boxes around in the attached image?



This thing looks like a railing that is REALLY THICK. It runs from the thing in the last photo (with the purple rectangle) to the aft sides of the 1.1" tub bulwarks P/S.

Here is another view where I have drawn a line through the thing in question:




And the last thing is some "structure" that the thing in the first two photos looks like it is attached to (unless there are ladders at the end of the superstructure that interrupt that "railing" before it actually gets to this little "tower").

But what the heck is that thing?



MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

Matthew, I am not sure what is lashed to the top of the rail, but the object boxed in purple is the stack for the diesel generator.

The "railing" you lined through appears in Navsource photo 0404931 (US Navy 1197-3-42) of the St. Louis. Instead of a railing this may be a bulwark - a low bulkhead that serves the same purpose as a railing.

Very high resolution images (80-90 Mbyte) of the St. Louis in the Naval History and Heritage Command Ship Photography collection show what appears to be a solid bulwark here (19-N-54226 16 Oct 1943). 19-N-28229 (6 Mar 1942) shows something like a spar or boom in place of a bulwark - similar to what you show in your picture. The vertical black streaks in your picture could be anything hung out over the spar.

These images are much, much, much higher resolution and quality than the Navsource images. Just go to the naval heritage web page and search for "USS St. Louis" CL-49 - be sure to use the double quotes. You can also search for any Brooklyn/Helena photos.

The "thing" sticking up at the after end of the after superstructure, just forward of turret #4 looks like a diesel generator exhaust. This is really apparent in 19-N-28229. The Clevelands were similar in construction to the Helena and they had an emergency diesel generator room aft of the after engine room. The exhaust pipe from the generator came up near the after end of the aft superstructure.

I have attached clips from the high resolution photos.

Phil

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

Does anyone have any photos showing the Strake pattern on the St. Louis and Helena?

I have decided to use some of the ridiculously thin paper I have to make the straking on these ships.

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

Personally, I think you'd be better off taping off the plating areas and shooting on a coat of primer, either as a group, or one at a time. You'll never get paper smooth enough without its own primer and wonder if you've considered the extra thickness that the adhesive will add.

The Navsource photo section for the Helena has damage diagrams that show the strake pattern at several points along the hull. For the most part it appears that the strakes were arranged with every other one on top of the two neighboring strakes. The Upper strake at the main deck level and the third strake down were "inside" strakes and the second one down was an "outside" strake fastened over the edges of the top and third down.

Actually, strakes were numbered starting at the keel and working up.

The pattern is similar to the Cleveland strake pattern shown here:

http://www.okieboat.com/CAD%20hull.html

However, it is not the same! The Clevelands had a complex arrangements where some of the strakes were layered clinker style, with the top edge under the strake above and the bottom edge over the strake below, and a few were welded edge to edge carvel style with no overlap. Check the diagrams and photos carefully.

I can't tell from the Helena and St. Louis photos if the strakes at the bow were horizontal or vertical. Again, the Cleveland bow had five vertical strakes up to the next to top strake. After that all strakes were horizontal.

The Helena and St. Louis had a large plate(s) surrounding the anchor bolster.

Phil

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

Do you know what Paper Mâché is?

The tissue I have is roughly .0008" thick. (8/10,000th"). in 1/700 scale that is a little over ½" in scale. With the adhesive soaked through the tissue, it increases the thickness to around ¾" in scale.

Getting the tissue smooth isn't a problem. You just run a bit of water on the hull, and then use a feathering brush to smooth it. When it is smooth you allow it to dry. The Starch in the paper will cause it to adhere (very thin papers have that effect due to van der waals forces) And then you add a slight amount of CA to it, which floods exactly to the limits of the paper.

I have used this technique on 1/35 scale armor, and on 28mm figures (Gaming figures, like Romans, Greeks, Saxons, Franks, Vikings, Gepids, Turks, Ghavnavids, etc.) to produce things like raised patterns on shields, or metal plates on Armor.

I am anxious to see if I can get it to work on a ship. And the nice thing about it is that if you screw up, getting it off is really simple.

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

Question about the tops of the turrets on the Brooklyn and St. Louis-classes.

This photo:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/049/0404938.jpg

Shows what looks like hand/foot-rails around the tops of the turrets on USS St. Louis.

I have seen a photo of USS Brooklyn that looks to have them as well.

The only problem?

I cannot seem to find anything in Photo Etch other than the IJN Funnel Footrails to use to replicate these.

While that isn't exactly a disaster, I have noticed that some other ships (notably BBs) have these on their Turret-tops as well.

Now I need to go look at the New Orleans-class to see if it had any.

But the IJN Footrails should work, should they not?

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

Here is a nice photo I came across at NARA of USS ST LOUIS in July 1944. It looks like she had a fresh paint job recently.

Hey all -

During my US cruiser research I've been trying to identify the specific director types on each ship. I know the Brooklyn class (and all wartime US cruiser classes except the Alaska CBs) used the Mark 34 director system for main battery fire control. My question is around the specific Shield type used on each class. I have the Floating Drydock ordnance pamphlet on the Mark 34 gun director which lists the shield type as "Shield Mark 7 Mod 0"; this is clearly the exact type used later on with the Cleveland and Baltimore classes, as well as the refitted Standard BBs. However the photos of Nashville I've been able to find clearly show a different shield type (http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/043/0404312.jpg). Does anyone know what shield mark/mod this is and if so, is there any information available on it?

Cheers
Ian

I am not sure about the exact model number of these shields. However, there is a reason why the Brooklyn's shields were different. The earliest model of the MK-34 director lacked the rangefinder of the later versions. http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/048/0404835.jpg This version, which had only spotting glasses in the sides, was fitted to the seven Brooklyn's and the Vincennes. Vincennes was lost with her MK-34's unmodified. However, the Brooklyn's all had rangefinders fitted as an add-on. This is why their director shields were different. The rangefinder was already incorporated in the versions installed in the St Louis's, the Wichita, and all later ships.

Good to know! Thanks!

It's amazing to me how hard it is to find info on directors. Now my search has me working on the Mk.33... which is a can of worms in and of itself!

Question about the 5"/38 Mounts and Gun Houses on St. Louis and Helena .

There seems to be some confusion in another thread that these were Mk. 22 SP 5"/38 Mounts (As on the Pre-war and Early-war Porter and Somers-classes).

When I had the impression that they were Mk.29 DP 5"/38 Mounts.


Which Mark of 5"/38 Twin Mount DID they have?

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16

Matthew,

The confusion arises because the twin mounts on the St Louis class had a rounded edge between the roof panels and the sides. http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/050/0405006.jpg
This was similar to the same area on the Porter's mounts. http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/pix2/0535618.jpg
Aside from this minor similarity in shape, the two mounts were both twins and carried 5" 38 cal guns. But that is where the similarity ends. The Porter mounts were low-angle only, intended to give the Porter's more fire power breaking through an enemy battle line's destroyers. The mount was a design dead-end as shown by the total rearmament of several of the class in 1944/45. The St Louis twins were true DP mounts and the direct design ancestors of the mounts carried on the battleships, cruisers, carriers and destroyers of the second world war. St Louis carried her original 5" mounts until her scrapping. Note that the same rounded edge appeared on the 5" 38 cal single mounts as well. It was the result of them being in the same "generation" of gun houses rather than them being the same (or even something close) design.