The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Aug 23, 2017 8:42 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 543 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 28  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:56 pm
Posts: 3
Location: Kansas City MO
What are the differences in the New Orleans Class Cruisers?


Hi All. I have a Quincy kit and a San Francisco kit I'm about to start. Can someone tell me if I can change these ships to others in the class? What is the difference between ships of this class? Thanks, TOM


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Well...
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 2:26 pm
Posts: 311
With the Quincy kit, you can only convert to one other ship - USS Vincennes. Both had a "cut-down" bridge structure as compared to the other members of the class (the other members had an additional level of windows). Consult your references and you'll see what I mean.

With the San Francisco, you can do a Minneapolis, Tuscaloosa or San Francisco. They have the same bridge structures with minor differences. However, the first 2 members, New Orleans and Astoria had more rounded turrets than the rest of the members of this class - so they are out. There are other differences, but I am away from home and don't have access to my references.

Consult pics on the Navsource site (link on first page of this site) for external differences. Additionally, Classic Warships makes a nice New Orleans class book. If you can get your paws on the Classic Warships' USS Minneapolis or USS San Francisco soft bound books (out of production), they are a great source of details of these members of this class.

Someone help me out if I've missed something.

HTH :cool_2:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:47 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 10:46 am
Posts: 2084
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Just going off of memory myself, but San Francisco had different hangar doors than the other ships. The Classic Warships books on the New Orleans class ships cover the differences.

-Devin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:39 pm 
There were quite a few differences, depending on time period. The first three had the curved (top to bottom) face-plates on the turrets. Of these, Minneapolis and Astoria had the signal bridges plated in on the front. This level was 1 and 1/2 deck levels in height, and the floor was raised the 1/2 deck before being plated in. San Francisco looked like Minnie and Astoria, except she had the flat-faced turrets. On these four, the searchlight tower rested on the deck, with the fore and aft supports going around the large vent intake. Also, the 5" guns on the main deck had the center gun on each side closer to the centerline than the other 4.

Tuscaloosa differed in having the signal bridge plated in at the lower level, with the extra 1/2 deck height above. She also had a narrower searchlight tower, which rested on top of the large vent. Her 5" guns were differently arranged, with the aftermost guns inset, rather than the middle ones. Quincy and Vincennes had the first turret moved 8' aft, requiring the barbette for turret 2 to be 6" higher and exposed on its front face. Vincennes had a slightly different style of main battery director, as well. The signal bridges on both were not only not plated in, but the wings were trimmed back. This required a supporting structure to be added to hold up the after part of the nav-bridge deck. They had the narrower searchlight towers, like CA-37. Also, while their middle 5" guns were inset, it was not as far as in the first 4 ships.

A few differences in the 4 survivors, as modernized, include New Orleans retaining part of her original signal bridge front bulwark, and she and CA-37 had the forward 40MM added at the original signal bridge level. San Fran and Minnie had it the 1/2 deck level higher. San Fran had the hangar roller door replaced with an accordian style door during her Guadalcanal repairs. The list goes on, but these are a few of the differences. Get lots of photos, but be careful they are all from the same period.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:37 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 4:31 pm
Posts: 3312
Location: Plattsburg, Missouri
Kit availability:

Scale 1/1250

Image
Neptune USS New Orleans

Image
Neptune USS Quincy

_________________
Timothy Dike
Owner & Administrator
ModelWarships.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 5:56 am
Posts: 135
Location: Bataan, Philippines
Now that I'm done with my Amatsukaze and If I ever get the Nagara out of the way, I'm planning on tackling the USS Quincy.

I have 7 - 1/700 "New Orleans" kits including the rather rough WSW Quincy kit. Upon looking it over I've spent the last year figuring out all the modifications and upgrades it will need.

Has anyone built this kit and if so, is it as much of a headache to "polish" as I think it will be? It can be done but the amount of work and evergreen needed to do it justice looks like it will mandate a Looooong time.

Regards,

J.J.

_________________
The closer the correspondence between a man's perception of reality and reality itself, the greater the man. - Renato Constantino


Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:54 am
Posts: 36
We have all 3 variations of the New Orleans Class CAs in-stock:

35114 - CA-38 USS San Francisco (1942)
35115 - CA-32 USS New Orleans (1942)
35118 - CA-39 USS Quincy (1942)

As everyone has noted, there are major differences in the class. Between these 3 kits you can build any of the ships in the class.

Group I
CA-32 USS New Orleans
CA-34 USS Astoria
CA-36 USS Minneapolis

Group II
CA-37 USS Tuscaloosa
CA-38 USS San Francisco

Group III
CA-39 USS Quincy
CA-44 USS Vincennes

_________________
John Sheridan
Yankee Modelworks


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:19 am
Posts: 150
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Guys,
How about a build of the San Francisco in 1/144? It's not a kit but here's my offering.

Image

Image

Image

This is my first attempt at scratchbuilding; it'll never be shown at a show because there are so many things wrong with it but I try new techniques on it and continue to work on it between other projects. These pictures are little old, the masts have been raised and I went back and added a bunch of hull detail as well as an accommodation ladder over on the port side just aft of the A/C catapult.

Good modeling to all,

Bruce


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: SF Turret Top Colors
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:30 am 
Dana, where will your monograph be available? I am doing USS San Francisco as in early '36 and have been in contact with several members of her crew, including one gentleman who was aboard from '36 to '40. There is confusion, to say the least. I have Larkin's book and pics from Friedman and Classic Warships which show identification numbers on turret 3, and stripes on the forward turrets. Do you have evidence what the colors were? I can wait for your book, but I need to have some idea that the aswer is in it, so I can quit looking and agonizing.

Thanks

Gary


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: San Francisco colors...
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:09 pm
Posts: 7
Hi Gary,

I'm not sure about the ettiquet of post this under Arizona, but here goes...

I’ve been using Larkins for most of my ship assignment data, but I hope to get some more-detailed primary data in the next couple of days. You managed to select the one date where I’ve got the most confusion on San Francisco, but here’s what I do know:

In July 1935, San Francisco was in CRUDIVSIX (VS-11) and would have used green for the forward turrets and black for the after turret - if the turrets were color coded at that time.

By July 1936, SF was flag of CRUDIVEIGHT (VS-14S). I’ve nothing yet on this unit, but if the turrets were painted, the after turret would have used red.

By 1937, SF was flag of CRUDIVSEVEN (initially VS-12S, VCS-7 on 1 July 1937). Forward turrets were a green stripe, after turret used red (generally a red disc at this time).

In 1940, SF moved to back to CRUDIVSIX (VCS-6), which by this time was using a single black stripe on the forward turret; SF would probably have used black on the after turret, but I need to confirm this.

That probably doesn’t help much. I’ll see what turns up in the next few days, especially for the assignments in 1936. I’ve not yet turned any documentation on turret numbers, though most appear to have been used in 1934 and 1935; I suspect they were often in divisional colors.

Cheers,

Dana
(The book will be available on line from Meteor Productions - I'll make sure that details and a review copy surface here.)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:49 pm
Posts: 203
Location: Maryland
Gary Kingzett wrote:
Dana, where will your monograph be available? I am doing USS San Francisco as in early '36 and have been in contact with several members of her crew, including one gentleman who was aboard from '36 to '40. There is confusion, to say the least. I have Larkin's book and pics from Friedman and Classic Warships which show identification numbers on turret 3, and stripes on the forward turrets. Do you have evidence what the colors were? I can wait for your book, but I need to have some idea that the aswer is in it, so I can quit looking and agonizing.

Thanks

Gary


Find her CruDiv and position in the division and the colors are easy.

_________________
How do I get the pen to write here? Now my screen's all smeared with ink.........


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Turret tops and colors
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:24 pm 
Thanks, Dana. You have homed right in to my problem. I am building San Francisco as originally fit, except with the bridges plated in, which appears to limit me to post mid 1935.

Then for you aircraft fans, I scratchbuilt 6 little O3U-3's. That was pretty tough going in 1:192 scale, they are about 1 3/4" long with a wingspan of 2 1/4". That limits me to sometime before summer 1936. Fortunately, I interpreted Larkin correctly so the markings are for VS-11, aircraft 13, 14, 15 & 16 and are Willow Green.

But now we come to the conundrum. Were the turrets striped during that time, was there a number on turret 3, and was it color coded? I haven't been able to find any pictures dated early 1936 which were taken from above the deck line, so I don't have a clue about the answers. Here is hoping you find something definitive in the next few days.

Thanks for the info so far.

Gary


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:34 am 
I wrote this in response to Steve's inquiry, but when he mentioned saving it, I thought it might be good to add it here.

Quote:
Steve Joyce wrote:
So in order to convert the Mass to the Alabama and the San Francisco to the Tuscaloosa, what major surgery (like cutting up decks and superstructures) will be required. Minor changes are things i can create out of styrene.


What you must modify depends on the timeframe you want to depict. It looks like the San Fran will be the 1942 version, so I will stick with that. I will list the major differences for Tuscaloosa that I am aware of.

First, the bridge. Tuscaloosa was the first to have the Communications bridge level glassed in. (The level below the navigation bridge.) That level was 1 1/2 levels in height, and Tuscaloosa was glassed in with the windows the "normal" height above the existing deck, with "blank" space above the windows. Some view forward was blocked by turret II, so San Fran (and Astoria and Minneapolis) had a new deck added 1/2 level above the original comm bridge deck, and then it was glassed in at that level. (Placing the windows immediately below the nav-bridge deck.) Not having seen the actual kit, I can't be specific about the needed plastic surgery. However, the windows and deck will have to be lowered without lowering the nav-bridge.

Second, Tuscaloosa had a 20MM gallery added around the front of the bridge, 1/2 level above the comm-bridge deck (or where the "new" deck would have been on the other 3 mentioned units). 4 20MM were carried there.

Third, the rangefinder above the bridge still had the original (as built) angled surrounding shield on Tuscaloosa, while San Fran had an enlarged vertical shield that also held 2 20MM. (Equates to 2 of the 4 20MM on the gallery)

Fourth, the main-deck 5" positions were slightly different. On San Fran (and the others in the class) the middle gun of the 3 main deck guns on each side was inset slightly closer to the centerline than the guns immediately forward and aft. (The splinter screens barely hung over the deck-edge on the center guns, while the next ahead and behind had a significant overhang.) On Tuscaloosa, it was the aftermost gun on each side that was inset.

Fifth, the searchlight tower on Tuscaloosa rested entirely on the intake vent between the funnels, and was therefore narrower (fore-and-aft) than the corresponding one on the San Fran, the corners of which rested on the deck foreward and aft of the vent. New Orleans, Astoria, and Minneapolis had towers like San Fran, while Quincy's and Vincennes's were closer to Tuscaloosa's.

Lastly, the 20MM gallery around the after controls (high above turret III) carried 2 20MM on Tuscaloosa, and 4 on the San Fran. (The 2 missing guns correspond to the other 2 on the Tuscaloosa's bridge gallery, giving both ships a total of 12 20MM at this time.)

Even still, timeframe is everything. Tuscaloosa didn't have any 20MM until at least the summer of '42, so you can find MS-12R photos of her without them. But then, you would have to locate the .50 cal guns, and obtain more ship's boats. The 20MM appear to have been added in stages, so you may see photos with only part of them on board. You have to decide on the exact timeframe, and then decide how much you want to do. It looks as though the kit may give a good starting point, and the changes are probably all very "doable".


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 5977
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
Thanks Dick, excellent idea. I went back and looked at the Classic Warship SF - it incorporates NONE of the changes you mention, so I'll guess I'll be building her as SF after all.

_________________
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 Jul 01, 2007 9:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9226
Location: EG48
Dana M Bell wrote:
I’ve been using Larkins for most of my ship assignment data, but I hope to get some more-detailed primary data in the next couple of days. You managed to select the one date where I’ve got the most confusion on San Francisco, but here’s what I do know:

In July 1935, San Francisco was in CRUDIVSIX (VS-11) and would have used green for the forward turrets and black for the after turret - if the turrets were color coded at that time.

By July 1936, SF was flag of CRUDIVEIGHT (VS-14S). I’ve nothing yet on this unit, but if the turrets were painted, the after turret would have used red.

By 1937, SF was flag of CRUDIVSEVEN (initially VS-12S, VCS-7 on 1 July 1937). Forward turrets were a green stripe, after turret used red (generally a red disc at this time).

In 1940, SF moved to back to CRUDIVSIX (VCS-6), which by this time was using a single black stripe on the forward turret; SF would probably have used black on the after turret, but I need to confirm this.

That probably doesn’t help much. I’ll see what turns up in the next few days, especially for the assignments in 1936. I’ve not yet turned any documentation on turret numbers, though most appear to have been used in 1934 and 1935; I suspect they were often in divisional colors.

Cheers,

Dana

_________________
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  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1656
I am reposting this from the SN site.

Bill A. wrote:
Hey all,

Can anyone tell me how close the NO and
Astoria were in configuration (assuming a
1942 outfit for NO, of course)? And I have
the same question for Quincy and Vincennes
(obviously both in 1942 outfits).

Thanks in advance.

Bill


New Orleans never had the flag/communications bridge level glassed in. Astoria did. That caused a few differences in their AA outfits. New Orleans had the signal-flag "bags" installed at the nav-bridge level, Astoria's were at the comm-bridge level. N.O. had her rangefinder (r/f) atop the bridge removed and replaced by 2 20MM, while Astoria placed the 20MM on either side of the r/f. Both had 4 20MM on the hangar roof (1 ea fore and aft of each crane) and 2 forward of the elevated 5" mounts (1 per side). Astoria had 4 more around the back of the after director structure, while N.O. only had 2. N.O.'s last 2 20MM were on the front of the nav-bridge level, possible only because it was not glassed in. That gave both ships 12 20MM.

Quincy and Vincennes had different main battery directors - a MK-31 on Quincy and what looks like an early MK-34 (with no built-in r/f) on Vincennes. Each of these ships also received 12 20MM guns, basically arranged the same in each except that the 20MM gallery around the front of the bridge was 1/2 level lower on Vincennes. (Comm bridge level was 1 1/2 levels in height on all ships of the class to allow the conning tower to see over turret II.) This gallery had 4 20MM. 4 more were on the hangar roof, 2 forward of the raised 5" mounts and the last 2 aft of the after director structure as in N.O. Quincy retained the original r/f set up above the bridge, while Vincennes had a rudimentary open-bridge installed there instead. Vincennes had her bridge windows narrowed (top to bottom) and had the bridge wings slightly trimmed back. She also had "half-tub" projections in the bulwarks outboard of the nav-bridge windows. On the main-deck, Quincy had single "wavy" splinter screens added outboard of the 5" guns, with no "dividers" between guns, while Vinnie had individual tubs.

That should be enough to get you started. Hope this helps.

Dick J


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:31 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
Hi there,

Just dropping by to post this:

http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~pitroad/w/w114.jpg

Found it on the what's new on Pitroad's site.

This one's labelled as the Astoria, though I imagine the sprues will be common to all kits.

Someone forgot to put the main and quarter decks in!!

Mike. :smallsmile:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 5977
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
RE: Vincennes Port side Ms 12

tenacioustanaka wrote:
I'm looking for her port side cammo pattern and every book I have only shows starboard side while she wore ms 12(mod). Anyone have a clue where to find a shot of her from that perspective?

There does not seem to be much good early war photographic documentation of the Vinnie. This places her in the same enigmatic category as good IJN research photos.


Moved here by Mod at TT request.

_________________
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: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1656
Quincy wrote:
With the new New Orleans kit out, could you make an early 1942 Minneapolis using it, or would the upcoming Frisco kit be better suited?


The Frisco would be better. New Orleans has the same turrets as Minnie, but the Frisco kit should have the same bridge and light AA layout. (And, it looks like all of the weapons sprues have BOTH turret types on them.)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:25 pm 
Observations of an "out of the box" builder of the Trumpeter 1/700 New Orleans about 75% done follow:
1. Buy the kit, it's terrific. By far the best USN plastic 1/700 cruiser kit on the market. No flash, no sink holes no incomplete or broken parts.
2. The bridge and aft deck house sections fit together and align without any problems.
3. The stacks have piping detail that is oustanding.
4. The 20mms sit realistically low behind the shields so I'm using them "as is". Perception is important and the oversize is "lost" since they sit remote from other weapons. The 1.1s are probably OK but there are reasonable aftermarket options.
5. The 5" 25s sit too high (shields too low?) this is most evident on the forward mounts. My solution was to sand off the shoulders on the gun mounting posts and then shorten them so they sit lower. I also thinned the bases for the same reason. (My NIKO 5" 25s sit higher than my modified mounts.) Not perfect but gives a much better appearance. The barrels appear too long but that's for the next phase.
6. There are two different 8" barrel styles for the two turret face types. They look the same but are shaped and fit differently.
7. The WL plate needed a thin strip added to continue the armor belt to the waterline. The full hull has the armor belt.
8. The Mk 33 (28?) directors are outstanding. If Trumpeter would listen they should market them. Somebody should because there are none out there even in aftermarket resin. Both the open top and closed top directors of the Mk 28/33 type are needed.
9. No Aztec temples but lots of separate sloped ladders. They need to be thinned from behind and will look just OK.
10. The unique cranes are very well molded and the booms can be positioned. The catapults have small side platforms but are otherwise typical.
11. The small fittings are next. Quality and sizes of the parts looks fine.
12. The one "bust" is the searchlight structure between the stacks. The framing is way out of scale and beyond a simple fix. I opened up the framing a little but what can I say since PE would be too costly considering I will build the entire class including the two San Francisco versions plus the 1942 1/350 version.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 543 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 28  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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

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