The Ship Model Forum

Can't help with the fabrication part but the covers you're talking about are called chain locker covers. You could try molding them out of Apoxie-Sculpt or something similar.

_________________
On the ways:
1/350 AFV Club LST

I meant to post this in the Fletcher Class thread. Sorry.

_________________
Greg Willis

Current build: HMS Hood
Kit: Trumpy 1/350

Merged =)

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Hi everybody...

Get ready - it's another noobie question!

After reading through a stash of WWII US Naval history books, I've gotten it into my head that I want to build the USS Charles Ausburne, DD-570, as it looked when it was the flagship of Arleigh Burke in 1943-1944. Problem is...I know just enough about destroyers to know I don't know enough about destroyers.

I've tried to do my homework - I've read through the many posts here, I've scanned through destroyerhistory.org, history.navy.mil, Google, etc. In the end, it's like drinking from a firehose. I'm left with the impression that there are as many configurations on a Fletcher as there were Fletchers, and I've reached saturation.

So in the name of fairness, I exerted the effort to draw some conclusions on my own...and now I'm asking you guys to correct me. I figured that was better than just asking you to do my research for me

Below is an image I put together with the sources that led me to that conclusion in parentheses. I'm not claiming this is correct, it's just what I THINK is correct. I'd appreciate any input.



On the technical side, I have the 1/350 Tamiya Fletcher and the Trumpeter The Sullivans, and I'm no stranger to resin and PE and all the other aftermarket goodies that are available. I've built models for years, even a couple ships, my biggest stumbling block here is entirely one of research.

Lastly, I know history.navy.mil has some photos of exactly what I want to do - complete with one of Burke himself on the ship - but I'm afraid I'm too Fletcher-stupid right now to be able to dig out details from the far shots of the areas of interest (the weapons) to me. If only I knew what I was looking at

Anyway, thanks for looking!

Mike

Mike,

You have done pretty well on your homework. The Charles Ausburne was delivered in the early two twin 40-mm configuration, then went to Boston Navy Yard and was updated to the three twin 40-mm, eleven 20-mm configuration you have correctly ID. Her sisters built at Consolidated Steel at Orange TX after her, were modified at Charleston Navy Yard or completed to the three twin 40-mm configuration. I mention this because, Boston and Charleston Navy Yards modified Fletcher's just a little bit differently in the details. This is important because if you could not find a specific detail on one ship in a group of ships built at the same yard and modified by the same yard ... you normally can use a view from another sister to answer that question. The Charles Ausburne updated to the five twin 40-mm configuration at Mare Island Navy Yard in August-September 1944. I have posted a couple of views of this ship as completed at Boston Navy Yard in March 1943 and she should not have changed much except maybe for additional life rafts, canvas rail covers and such. Note that her main deck 20-mm bulwark shields behind the amidships twin 40-mm mounts are blended into the clipping room sides under the 40-mm mounts and not separate as Charleston Navy Yard did this detail. Hmmm ... the new Photobucket edit function "resizing" cropped the image instead of resizing it? Fortunately it cut off the bow area which wasn't of as much interest.

The Tamiya 1/350 Fletcher is the right early round bridge kit, but the kit does not have the correct style of "tubs" for the 40-mm mounts. The Trumpeter 1/350 Sullivans kit can be "robbed" for some of the parts ... amidships twin 40-mm tubs and clipping rooms ... but you will still lack some items that will need to be scratch built or found in an aftermarket set. There are resin kits available as well. Unfortunately all Fletcher kits seem to have at least a few things that need to be corrected. (Example: Tamiya's 5-in. mounts are too small.)

Hi Rick,

Thank you, thank you, and thank you! The answer to "What weapons were where?" was the foremost on my mind. It's good to have someone back me up on my conclusions.



And thank you for that, too...now that my first big question is answered, it's time to start delving into all the others that will come up. If I know I can rely on sister ships to fill in some of the general blanks, that might save me a lot of headaches.

Incidentally, I'm getting "United States Navy Destroyers of World War II." by John C. Reilly from the local library (it's being sent from another branch which is why I'm waiting on it). I've never seen it before but I'm hoping it will fill in a lot of details I wouldn't otherwise know to look for.

Thanks also for the pointers on the kits...I suspected I'd have to take some Trumpeter parts for the Tamiya kit. I enjoy a little bit of scratchbuilding so hopefully the project will be more fun and less pain Once I finally start this (after doing a little more research) I'll put some pictures in the Picture Post section.

I appreciate you taking the time to reply - it helps a lot.

Mike

A minor point on the Ausburne is the location of the torpedo handling crane for the after set of tubes. Ausburne had it and the associated catwalk on the port side of the 01 level between the tubes and the #3 5" mount. The more common position (and the one most often depicted on the models) was to starboard.

Dick,

You have picked out something that I had been aware of (not on the Ausburne however ... thanks) but had not thought much about as to why it was. I always wondered why the crane was on one side on some ships and on the other on others. The starboard side seemed to be the most common location for the crane. So, I went into my photos to see if there was a connection to Boston Navy Yard and it appears that there may well be. I noticed that several of the early built Boston NY and Bath Iron Works Fletchers that were completed OR MODIFIED BY BOSTON NY had the crane on the portside. It apears that a switch was made at a later date in the construction program on Fletchers so that the crane was installed on the starboard side. I don't have a good overhead shot of Charles Ausburne, but I have some overhead views for some of the ships that passed throuh the Boston Navy Yard.

The first image is of Guest (DD-472) built at Boston NY returning to the East Coast from Atlantic Convoy duty 21 June 1943 prior to being updated to the five twin 40-mm configuration. The smoke haze masks the image but you can see the portside crane. A special note about Guest was that she was the first Fletcher built with the amidships 40-mm "tubs" and that the waist 20-mm guns were located directly aft of the clipping room. In the BuShips files, the location chosen for these 20-mm guns was found to be "too close" to the clipping room and didn't provide an adequate Arc-of-Fire for these guns and was moved further aft on subsequent ships. You can compare this view with Foote below to see the difference.

The second image is of Foote (DD-511) on 8 July 1944 after she was updated to the five twin 40-mm configuration. She was a Bath Iron Works built unit that was updated from the early two twin 40-mm configuration to the three twin 40-mm configuration at Boston NY. She still retains the portside crane.

For comparison purposes, the third image is of Ausbune's Consoildated-built sister Dyson (DD-572) on 27 March 1943 after she was updated to the three twin 40-mm configuration at Charleston Navy Yard ... compare the differences with Ausburne and Foote. Her crane is on the starboard side.

The fourth image is of Claxton (DD-571) on 13 May 1944 at Mare Island Navy Yard after she was updated to the five twin 40-mm configuration. She was modified with an experimential wrap around bridge front walkway at that time that was a trial for the round-bridge Fletchers but didn't work out. In this nice MINY photo you can see the starboard side crane and the difference in amidship details. It seems that the location of the practice 5-in. loader depended on which side the crane was mounted.

Mike,

Reilly's book is an excellent reference source that you will enjoy reading. You may even want to make a copy of some pages for future reference. I keep finding stuff in my copy that I overlooked or forgot about after all these years.

Thanks Dick and Rick! I appreciate the guidance. These are definitely things I would either not notice on my own or would notice too late to fix.

I've also learned the Ausburne's anti-skid matting was the segmented type - at least at one point:
http://www.usscharlesausburne.com/photo_gallery.htm#

Did that kind of thing change with refits or can I trust that for my time period that would be appropriate?

On my Sullivans plans and pictures I have seen of similar 1945 refits of the midship quad 40mm gun tubs, there are the usual bulkheads with ammo racks in a semi circle. But on the bulkhead facing the bow of the ship there is a thicker/deeper "second curved wall" that is connected to the main bulkhead, was this for extra ammo racks? There is quite a bit going on in this area, and I want to try and put in all the detail. Thanks again for all the information that makes this so interesting.

Mike Glasgow

Mike,

I don't know exactly, but I suspect these are a ready service storage "bins/bays" for 40-mm ammo clips. This "storage" feature to the bulwark was common to all the Anti-Kamikaze Fletchers that I looked at. I have attached an image of an unknown Fletcher showing this area that was taken in December 1945 at Mare Island Navy Yard for the unmodified ship next to her ... Monssen (DD-798) ... I think I figured out which Fletcher this was at one time and now I can't remember for sure. The Howorth (DD-592) is a good candidate because she is a round-bridge unit, the installation of the Mk-63 and lack of an ECM mast seen in other photos in this sequence. If you look closely at the port 40-mm mount "bin" bulwark and compare to the starboard one, it appears that the clips are stored in a more horizontal stack than the normal racks that line splinter bulwarks for 40-mm mounts? Likely this was done to store more ammo clips in a given area without a ready-service "box". It is interesting in that different ships had different "things" attached to the outsides of these bin areas ... the Isherwood (DD-520) had the standard ready service clip racks attached to the OUTSIDE of the bulwark as does this ship. The top of this storage area could have served as a shelf to place helmets and life vests?

A similar storage method was used with the post-war twin 3-in. mounts.

Mike ... the other Mike,

It would appear that Ausburne had the segmented anti-skid matting. Not an area I'm "expert" in and i don't have any good photos of the decks for her to be sure. The only photos I have for the Consolidated-built Fletchers showing the decks (it is unlikely that Boston Navy Yard would have changed the matting) are in 1944-45 and show the segmented matting.

Rick, thanks once again for that great picture on the 40mm storage. I thought they were extra ammo storage racks, but it's always nice to see the photo detail. I can see the horizontal storage slots. Back to scratchbuilding....

Mike Glasgow

Mike,

After looking at a few more photos, I believe there are three ammo clip racks in each of these "pockets" to the bulwarks. My guess is these were assembled in a shop somewhere, maybe even were mass produced on contract? Looking at the photos it makes sense that these should all be to a common design and they could be assembled from simple straight structural steel components mass produced. Being in segments rather than as one whole curved rack allowed for them to be fitted close enough to the curve but made construction simpler. Plus I'm pretty sure that the angle that the ammo clips are stacked roughly equals the angle that the top "shelf" cover shows. Likely these ready service racks would have been covered with a "flame suppressor" covering in operational use until the guns were actually being used.

Rick, I see what you described about the three sections. You mentioned the flash suppressing covers, I might have to go that route if the shelves are too complex for 1/96 scale. I have studied the Fletcher class ships for over a year now and appreciate your in depth explanations. Somehow it helps me scratchbuild when I know what the item is. After viewing hundreds of pictures I realized every ship was unique in the small details. A good example is the last picture you posted showing the Quad mounts, shows the spare barrel box behind the aft stack with two floater net baskets, instead of on the side of the stack with one floater basket. Also small storage boxes and lights and cable routing all slightly different. I'm trying real hard to distinguish between the 1945 ship, and the museum ships-Sullivans, Kidd, Cassin Young "walkaround" photo collections on this forum.

Best regards
Mike Glasgow

Mike,

After I posted, I was looking at some other Fletcher photos looking for something else and I noticed one with four sections for the portside and starboard side "ammo clip-bays". I looked at several of the Mare Island Navy Yard modified Fletchers and they all seem to have four of these sections. Except for the Howorth which may not have been actually modified at Mare Island, but at a private contractor. The Howorth was one of the earlier modified ships and the Navy may have decided to up the storage capacity. So I guess you need to go by the photos/plans you have of The Sullivans and be sure of how many there are. I do not have a clear photo of The Sullivans showing the ammo-clip bays, but, it appears to me that The Sullivans had four sections for each "tub". I base that on the extent of the bay's "bulge" in the bulwark on the either side of the ship ... The Sullivans bays match the bays size on DD-531 and DD-535 and is longer than the ones on the Howorth.

Hi guys...

Newbie me again from a few posts back. I've been doing some research and finally got my Gold Medal Models PE set for 1/350 Fletchers. I have a Tamiya Fletcher and a Trumpeter Sullivans and I'm not afraid to kitbash and/or scratchbuild to get the DD-570 Charles Ausburne I'm after (I'm even reading a biography about Arleigh Burke )

I've compared what the GMM set has you doing to kit parts against online photos of some of the many aftermarket accessories and I'm starting get a little overwhelmed. Near as I can tell, you can just about get aftermarket versions of every part on the sprues!

So can some of you experienced old salts give me some guidance on the destroyer aftermarket world...do L'Arsenal 20mm guns really look any better when it's all said and done than kit parts dressed up with PE? Are resin 5" gun turrets worth it when you have the PE to add to the kit parts? Do I really need resin lifeboats? I'm not afraid to spend the time or money, but after going down this route in the airplane world, I realize there's a point of diminishing returns...I just don't know where that point is when it comes to choosing 1/350 Fletcher accessories.

I also realize this is largely a matter of opinion, but I trust the opinion of people who have seen these various aftermarket accessories first hand - best I can do is try to envision one thing and compare to photos of another and that doesn't always tell the story.

So if anyone cares to share their opinions on the best way to dress up a 1/350 Fletcher, I'm all ears, and I'd greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,
Mike

Mike,

I have both kits as well (GMM's PE also) and am in the middle of the build. I am using Tamiya's kit primarily. Being somewhat of a newbie myself I'll say this: The Sullivans, while not being an overall superiror kit to Tamiya's, does have more realistic 5" mounts. They are more to scale than Tamiya's which look a bit small. Also the Sullivan's mounts barrells are offset just a bit to the left (when looking headon) which appears to be accurate. Tamiyas are dead center. Additionally, Tamiya's barrells have a step in them which should not be there. You will have to perform a little surgery if you use the sullivans mounts. There is a fin on the back of the gun houses that looks like it should be there. It's on Tamiya's but not on Trumpys. You'll also have to rig the mount pegs (dowels?) just a bit.

As for the 20mm's, I went ahead and ordered them from L'Arsenal. The pack I got have two optional gun sheilds, one with a single notch and one with a stepped down notch. I'm not sure myself which to use but it's nice to have the choice. Also the kit comes with two optional rings that go around the mount for the gunners to stand on. I'm not sure if these should be raised above the deck or mounted flush. I went with flush. Rick, if you read this maybe you could tell us. Maybe they weren't even used on the ship I am building. (DD 449 USS Nicholas). I would order the Oerlikons.

Regards,
Greg

_________________
Greg Willis

Current build: HMS Hood
Kit: Trumpy 1/350

Thanks for the pointers Greg...it sure helps to have some opinions from those who have been down this path before.

The real motivation for this aftermarket question is that I'm itching to get started on the model but I want to make sure all my ducks are in a row before I go off and do something I can't redo or undo. I do that way too much with things I'm familiar with

Mike

Mike and Greg,

The shields mounted on 20-mm appeared in several different shapes. These were basically just flat plates that were cut to the desired shape and bolted on to the frame. It seems that the most common shapes were rectangular or with 45 degree "notches" taken off each side next to the gun. The square "notch" was also used. I have never tried to figure out which ships had which ... since it could be changed fairly easily. The ring was installed around the base for the gunner to stand on so that the gun could be depressed lower. I don't recall that the early Fletchers used this ring much ... but I can be wrong on that. Some Fletchers had a raised grated "platform" for the three 20-mm in the tub on the fantail that may have been there for the same reason. I had read in one of he BuShips files that there was some complaining about the height of the early 20-mm mounts (a short gunner problem ). But, this was not universal and was discontinued during the production run as best I can tell. The Nicholas didn't have either of these features as best I can recall. This image of one of the fantail 20-mm mounts on the Nicholas gives you an idea of the appearance of her added guns ... http://www.ussnicholas.org/43ob_37.html ... and this as built photo of the O'Bannon shows one of her 20-mm mounts ... http://www.destroyerhistory.org/fletche ... ne_05.html ... I can't find one with the "base" ring right now.