The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Jun 18, 2018 10:10 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 579 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:21 pm
Posts: 4
Hi All, I have been looking for a copy of Warship Pictorial #5 and saw one on ebay for $35, listed in good condition. I snagged it and the "good " condition is remarkable. No torn pages, no stains, etc.. This book is also on Amazon for $75 to $265. My dad was on board the 'Frisco from April '42 until the end of the war. I am about half finished with my 1:350 model of CA 38. Wish I had done it a lot sooner. And I want to thank those who guided and advised me with my build.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:21 pm
Posts: 4
I am building my first 1:350 of USS San Francisco CA 38 and got some good help from a few "new friends". I also picked up a copy of Warship Pictorial #5. Got it off ebay for only $35 and it's in great shape. Also, my dad was on board 'Frisco from April '42 to the end of the war, which is my inspiration for this build. I have also read most, if not all, the posts about the 'Frisco and her sister ships and the detailed knowledge of these ships is amazing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6287
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
From the National Archives, via Roger Torgeson, CA-44 Vincennes, January 1942 (according to the caption).
Attachment:
CA-44 80-G-350902 #1cropped.jpg
CA-44 80-G-350902 #1cropped.jpg [ 922.21 KiB | Viewed 1181 times ]

Attachment:
CA-44 80-G-350902 #2crop.jpg
CA-44 80-G-350902 #2crop.jpg [ 601.17 KiB | Viewed 1181 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: Thu Jun 22, 2017 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 6:38 am
Posts: 254
Location: Czech Republic
Thanks a lot for posting - a very interesting photo indeed, still showing a remainder of her "bird bath" tub at the top bridge level (removed before Midway), but splinter shields around her 5" guns already in place. And of course her unique splotched Ms12 camo pattern!

_________________
My Gallery | At works: 1/700 Yunagi 8/1942 | In preparation: 1/700 USS Chicago 8/1942


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1317
Location: England
Is there any aftermarket company that does replacement PE bridge/pilothouse faces with open windows for early war New Orleans class cruisers in 1/700? I see Flyhawk does in 1/350 but not 1/700, and the only other "full" sets I can find in 1/700 are for the 1944 San Francisco.

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 6:38 am
Posts: 254
Location: Czech Republic
Hello Vlad,
I checked the "1/700 WWII USS San Francisco CA-38 Heavy Cruiser Detail Set for Trumpeter 05746/05310" on the web about a month ago and it contains parts for both 1942 and 1944 versions of the SF. That means that - whichever version you build - you´ll be left with quite a lot of parts that you cannot use, but...
Vladi

_________________
My Gallery | At works: 1/700 Yunagi 8/1942 | In preparation: 1/700 USS Chicago 8/1942


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1317
Location: England
Aha, I see what you mean. That is actually very interesting since I was considering building several members of the class. Thank you!

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 6:38 am
Posts: 254
Location: Czech Republic
Well, same with me here ... just that I need all of them in 1942 version :D

_________________
My Gallery | At works: 1/700 Yunagi 8/1942 | In preparation: 1/700 USS Chicago 8/1942


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:25 am
Posts: 2103
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Vlad wrote:
Is there any aftermarket company that does replacement PE bridge/pilothouse faces with open windows for early war New Orleans class cruisers in 1/700? I see Flyhawk does in 1/350 but not 1/700, and the only other "full" sets I can find in 1/700 are for the 1944 San Francisco.



Five Star Models does a USS San Francisco PE Set which includes the Bridge Faces with Open Windows for the Early-War New Orleans-class.

It is a very complete set for the New Orleans, Astoria, Minneapolis, and San Francisco (with some minor caveats for each).

But it is missing several components for doing the upper Bridge Tower platforms for ships other than USS San Francisco.

I would desperately love to see a PE set and a Correction Forward Decking for the Trumpeter Quincy and Vincennes in 1/700, as these kits are wonderful, save for a few niggling details (like the position of the forward Turret).

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:25 am
Posts: 2103
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Vladi wrote:
Well, same with me here ... just that I need all of them in 1942 version :D



That is what I am currently working on (save for the Tuscaloosa).

I have only got USS San Francisco near completed, as a Test-Build with the PE set.

And I have a huge list of Modifications for each ship, as well as parts that need to be made to correct the Trumpeter Kits (such as the Aft Con Station over the Hangar). It has a huge number of things that are "wrong" in both the kit, and the PE set.

As well as that the PE set does not have the correct splinter shielding for many sections of the SF.

And the "Wind Baffles" don't look right (which has bugged the hell out of me).

But it is something that I keep hoping a company like Five Star will eventually correct, or provide additional PE kits for the other members of the class.

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1317
Location: England
Moving No.1 turret to the correct place on the Trumpeter kit is not difficult http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm :wave_1:

Also, surely once you've put the substantial effort in to fit all that brass onto a kit, the fact some of the parts might need a bit of modification for a sister-ship is at most a small nuisance, definitely not a deal-breaker for the set.

Anyway, I have vague dreams of building the whole class but I'm just trying to work out what permutations ideally allow me to build each ship exactly once but still cover most of the different refits and camouflage schemes.

On that note, what are the differences between the San Francisco and Tuscaloosa in 1944, when they were wearing Ms.33? SF seems to be fairly well photographed around this time but T isn't at all, and I can't work out what I would need to do to the bridge on Trumpeter's kit to make it accurate.

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3100
Both cruisers wore pattern 13D, but TUSCALOOSA was in Ms 31a ... http://www.usndazzle.com/ship.php?id=45 ... and SAN FRANCISCO was in Ms 33 ... http://www.usndazzle.com/ship.php?id=46 ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1721
Vlad wrote:
On that note, what are the differences between the San Francisco and Tuscaloosa in 1944, when they were wearing Ms.33? SF seems to be fairly well photographed around this time but T isn't at all, and I can't work out what I would need to do to the bridge on Trumpeter's kit to make it accurate.

There were quite a few differences. It might be easiest to break up the differences into categories.

8" mounts - identical

5" mounts - SF: on the three main deck 5" mounts on each side, the middle one was the inset one
T: on the three main deck 5" mounts on each side, the after one was the inset one

40MM - On T, the forward set was 1/2 deck level lower than on SF
On T, the starboard hangar quad was slightly further aft, with a 20MM forward of it
On SF, the fantail tubs were round. On T, they were stretched forward under the director tubs

20MM - totally different arrangement. T never had 20MM on bow. Galleries abeam searchlights different. You need photos to sort it out.

Bridge - T retained more of her original pilothouse than SF (wider). On both, the open bridge widened as you moved aft, but on SF, they cut back inward abeam the director structure while on T they retained the width of the back of the open bridge. On SF, flag bags at level of 40MM, on T at level of pilothouse. 20MM galleries on bridge front at same level on both.

Vents aft of second stack. On SF, one wide rectangular "mushroom" type vent. On T, two square vents that curved aft. Trash incinerator and projection booth positions differed. Need photos to sort it out.

After mast - SF had her mast replaced by a heavier mast slightly further forward that had short trailing legs and a masthead platform for a tracking radar that was not installed. T retained her original mast.

There were a lot of detail differences. This list is only to let you know the places you need to examine in the photos. Just so you know, the Trumpy 1944 kit bridge has proportion problems even for SF. Good luck on your build.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1317
Location: England
Thanks! I was aware of some of the differences (the 5" locations) but it's great to have a catalog of the smaller ones, especially AA guns and the bridge. I've been looking at reviews, sprue shots and built shots of Trumpeter's SF '44 and I feel that there is something wrong with the bridge. It looks to me as if it's too narrow, is this a known issue or is it just me? If it is an issue, then if/when I do make a late war NO class, it seems I've got kit surgery on my hands regardless of whether I do SF or a sister. Still, good photos of Tuscaloosa late war seem to be lacking (even with those from the USN dazzle site that I haven't seen before) so it might be hard to place those 20mm, although the funnel gallery on T seems to be the same as on New Orleans.

The camouflage differences are particularly interesting to me, as shipcamouflage.com does not pick up on T being in Ms.31a. However, that dazzle site is inconsistent, as it calls for 5-H with 5-N in in the caption to Photo 1 on the Tuscaloosa page, but 5-L with 5-N for T in the page for the pattern (http://www.usndazzle.com/design.php?cat ... for_num=32). Which is it? I do want to build one of the ships in that pattern, now I'm struggling to decide between the two: how I've always imagined the ships (Ms.33 version as I was unaware of the other) or the deeper colours and stronger contrast of the Ms.31a, which I would generally prefer if it wasn't for my prior bias in this case. :heh:

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3100
The Shipcamouflage.com website is an older database, that has not been updated to any great extent for years. Most info was based on what "pattern" was applied, not which specific paints were used on a given ship. The design sheets were drawn with certain colors in mind, but they were not a steadfast direction to ONLY use those colors. In a brief explanation of what the USN did with the dazzle camo assignments for ships, it wasn't as simply as saying apply Ms 3x/xxD and looking up the pattern color "rules". The USN sent out specific dazzle measure assignments to each ship that called out a pattern AND what colors of paints were to be applied to that ship. Lee Johnson has been spending a lot of time at NARA tracking down the those assignment letters sent to the ship and yard. I would trust what Lee has noted for each individual ship. This explains why some ships used Black and others used 5-N Navy Blue for the darkest color.

This doesn't take into account that when crews applied a pattern in a forward base or while touching up the pattern, they could well use different paints as well.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1721
Vlad wrote:
I've been looking at reviews, sprue shots and built shots of Trumpeter's SF '44 and I feel that there is something wrong with the bridge. It looks to me as if it's too narrow, is this a known issue or is it just me? If it is an issue, then if/when I do make a late war NO class, it seems I've got kit surgery on my hands regardless of whether I do SF or a sister.

I don't know how widely known this fact is, but I have known about it since the kit came out. Consider this, the original pilothouse was not removed and replaced. The original front face was retained and the windows replaced by ports (only one in the front face as first modernized, but increased to three - one for each original window - when the bridge wings were added back later). That should give you a reference for how narrow the '44 kit's front face is compared to what it should have been. The angled side panels were retained possibly as far out as the width of the first two windows. In their zeal to increase arcs for the 40MM, that was the limit of SF's bridge as first modernized. The open bridge above was the width of the revised pilothouse and the "wings" extending back along the superstructure sides were straight back from the sides of the open bridge. When it was determined that they had taken too much, narrow wings were added at the pilothouse level and the open bridge was widened at the back. The front face remained the same width, but the bridge angled out toward the back and then narrowed back to the width of the bridge face going back along the superstructure. Using the '42 kit for reference, that should give you some idea of how wide the revised structure needs to be. I am still working out how I intend to correct this myself.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1317
Location: England
Hmm, what a mess, although thanks for confirming its not just my eyes and for the detailed description! I don't really see how it can be fixed without scratch building at the very least the pilot house level.

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:25 am
Posts: 2103
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
The Five Star Photo Etch Kit has a complete 1944 SF Bridge, with the problems largely corrected from this kit.

Since I won't be building anything later than Summer of 1943 for a LONG WHILE, I have not paid too close attention to these issues.

I am currently only building Kits from June/July of 1942 - Jan of 1943, and in the Pacific Theatre.

Eventually I will begin Kits from Dec 1941 - June 1942, and from Jan of 1943 - July 1943.

But currently I have models for all of the Pacific New Orleans-class, and a big list of changes for each kit that will allow the creation of that class from July/Aug of 1942 to Jan of 1943.

And I have one model of USS San Francisco that I built basically as a Test-bed for learning PE, that didn't correct many of the errors. It is primarily for getting back in shape, and learning how to get the PE and Rigging to look right in terms of just attaching it to the model.

As for correcting the forward Turret on the Quincy and Vincennes, I am a little leery of it being "easy."

I have noticed that I can cut out the barbette, with a ⅛" extension of the barbette's diameter at the aft of the barbette, and then turning it around, so that the deck that was behind the barbette is now in front of it. This would require a bit of clean-up work in getting the deck planking re-blended into the modification.

Not impossible, by any means. But neither it is especially "easy."

The other option that I thought of was making a new deck that is 3D Printed, or a PE insert. You would scrape off the planking down to a depth of .003" (the usual thickness of PE), and then cut the barbette out. Then, glue in the PE insert, and re-attach the barbette.

Both options require basically the same amount of work.

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 6:29 pm
Posts: 1721
MatthewB wrote:
As for correcting the forward Turret on the Quincy and Vincennes, I am a little leery of it being "easy."
I have noticed that I can cut out the barbette, with a ⅛" extension of the barbette's diameter at the aft of the barbette, and then turning it around, so that the deck that was behind the barbette is now in front of it. This would require a bit of clean-up work in getting the deck planking re-blended into the modification.
Not impossible, by any means. But neither it is especially "easy."
The other option that I thought of was making a new deck that is 3D Printed, or a PE insert. You would scrape off the planking down to a depth of .003" (the usual thickness of PE), and then cut the barbette out. Then, glue in the PE insert, and re-attach the barbette.
Both options require basically the same amount of work.

I went a different route. First, carefully cut off the barbette. Next, from the extreme sides of the hole (including the outer edges of the part covered by the barbette) cut along the plank line forward to the end of the planking. Then cut along that forward plank line and remove the piece. Clean up the edges. Now, further aft on the deck, cut out a section of deck from under the forward superstructure. (Trumpy was kind enough to continue the planking through this hidden space. You will be covering it with the superstructure anyway so a new hole there won't matter.) Make this graft piece wider and longer than needed. Trim the back edge of the barbette hole square to the line that will be the new center of the barbette. Cut the graft piece to fit and carefully glue it in place. The sides of the graft disappear into the re-scribed plank lines, the forward edge can be re-scribed along the front edge of the planking, and the after edge will be covered by the reused barbette. Having the squared off hole under the center of the barbette puts the line of the after end of the graft directly under the widest part of the re-attached barbette, covering the whole line. Since the plank spacing is not always uniform on Trumpy kits, before you cut out the sections, use a pencil to mark the centerline. When you cut, keep the centerline on center and the planking lines on both sides will match up.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1317
Location: England
You guys are massively over thinking the barbette thing. I respect your right to be perfectionist but all I did was carefully "lift" the barbette off the deck with the chisel-like blade attachment for my scalpel. This leaves a round hole in the deck significantly smaller than the overall barbette diameter. Plug this with a circle of styrene, sand smooth and glue the barbette in the correct place. You only lose deck planking detail over a crescent shaped area just in front of the barbette that is about 4mm at its widest point (centerline). And most of this area is seamless because it's the original deck plastic, with only an even smaller crescent of replacement material inside it. You can re-scribe this if you like, but it's barely visible in 1/700 because (assuming the turret is parked forward) it's completely in the shadow of the blast bags and gun barrels. I'll see if I can dig up my progress pictures later.

EDIT:

So, I forgot how poorly I photographed this project, and also quite how big the "crescent" was, but my point still stands. Not that difficult and quite easy to conceal without jumping through hoops to replace the nearby deck planking.

Attachment:
IMAG0168.jpg
IMAG0168.jpg [ 104.67 KiB | Viewed 732 times ]


Can't even spot it finished: http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm

_________________
Vlad

Tired of waiting for a kit? Dare to modify, dare to kitbash! :thumbs_up_1:

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 579 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29  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