The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Feb 21, 2018 12:21 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1073 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 50, 51, 52, 53, 54  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 2:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3048
Personally, I don't bother with rigging on 1/700 scale models or for that matter I don't USE PE railing. In most (ALL?) cases such details added to a model are way over-scale and I build for enjoyment not to stress myself. :Mad_6: When I look at photos taken of real ships that would be equivalent to what one would see looking at a 1/700 model standing from a relatively short distance, rigging is completely invisible as is railing. However, using PE parts for things like Radar antennas is another matter where plastic antenna look too thick. 1/350 scale models are different animals.

Here are a few images of USS LAFFEY and her sister USS WOODWORTH (a near identical sister), that shows the basic rigging for the early 1942 built units of the Repeat BENSON-GLEAVES classes with quad 1.1-in guns. USS MONSSEN likely would be a little different, but I don't have any close up views of her rigging that I have not already posted of her earlier from the May 1942 view. These views, particular of WOODWORTH show the radio wire antennas, mast stays, flag ropes, etc fairly well.

A set of drawings for USS NIELDS shows many of these same rigging details from the HNSA website ... http://www.hnsa.org/wp-content/uploads/ ... /dd616.pdf ...

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Posts: 152
Thank you for those pictures (and link)! On nearly the same note, I'm clueless with signal flags. Could anyone enlighten me as to what flags might likely be flown during the USS Laffey's night engagement against the Hei? I don't feel like I see flags frequently, so perhaps none?

I also hear your thoughts on rigging/railings in scale. This model is 1/350, so I am in favor a a decent rigging job. I may let some things slide though, such as the signal flag lines (unless I need to be flying any flags).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline
Model Monkey
Model Monkey

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:27 pm
Posts: 2804
Location: USA
Some new "ragtop" 5"/38 mounts are now in design for the Dragon 1/350 kits. See: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=161238&p=718255#p718255

_________________
Have fun, Monkey around.

-Steve Larsen
Catalog: https://modelmonkey.wixsite.com/modelmonkey

On the ways:
1/350 USS Saratoga CV-3 ('44)
1/350 USS Yorktown CV-10 ('45)
1/192 USS Missouri BB-63 ('45)
1/350 HMS Duke of York ('45)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 6:43 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:08 pm
Posts: 78
Location: Yorktown, Indiana, USA
For a night engagement signal flags would not be visible, flashing light would be used for visual signals.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 09, 2017 6:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:25 am
Posts: 2036
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
And still no one makes the Mk. 4 Radar antenna that these (and other) ships had in the Early-war.

Such a pain.

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: Sun May 14, 2017 7:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 5:21 pm
Posts: 73
Location: Puck, Poland
Hello, guys!

As Dragon's Benson/Gleaves kits in 1/700 seem to have been out of production for some time now, I started to wonder- are they really that much superior to SkyWave kits? The Skywaves are still available in hobby shops all over the world, and I don't know if I should wait for a re-release of Dragons that may never happen, or just go with the Skywave.

I'd like to make USS Lansdowne as seen in 1945, or other destroyer in Measure 22.

_________________
To all kits manufacturers reading this:
kindly requested are plastic HMS Lion in any scale, and Kinugasa in 1:350.

Thanks in advance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 10:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3048
I feel that the DML BENSON-GLEAVES 1/700 scale kits are better detailed and allow more options. But, if the DML kits are not available, the Skywave kits could be used. Depending on how accurate you want the model to be, modifications would be required as needed.

When you say " USS LANSDOWNE or OTHER destroyer as seen in 1945", there would be several configurations depending on when in 1945 and which destroyer you decide to model. It has been awhile since I have taken a close look at the Skywave BENSON-GLEAVES kits for me to say which one would be best for modeling USS LANSDOWNE. She was a Repeat-GLEAVES class unit, which narrows the options down some.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 20, 2017 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 140
Location: Austin, TX
Hey all -

Having a little trouble identifying the exact build of the small searchlight platform on DD-483 AARON WARD and sistership DD-484 BUCHANAN. Does anyone have any good closeups or any info on the "types" of SL platforms? I've identified a few different versions in different locations depending on the date of the refits.

Interestingly the Floating Drydock plans for DD-483 show the ship with the shorter and wider platform, when wartime photos show it with a taller platform with wider pipe railing - BUCHANAN shows the same.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Ian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3048
I posted images of USS AARON WARD in the first few pages of this thread. Specifically on page 2.

Here is an example of the searchlight platform views I posted earlier. Sister USS BUCHANAN was identical or nearly so.

The USN had two basic locations for the searchlights, at the aft end of the midships deckhouse or on the forward end of the aft deckhouse. Some units had the searchlight relocated during subsequent refits.

It may be laborious, but going through this thread has a lot of information and images of the BENSON-GLEAVES dual class posted.


Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 21, 2017 11:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Posts: 152
A quick thank you all! After 3 years of (non-continuous) work, I finally finished my model of USS Laffey DD-459 in 1/350. She is intended to be portrayed on the night she sank, as she charged towards the Hei. Sometime in the next couple weeks I'll set up my "photography studio" and get some quality pictures. In the mean time, here is a cheesy iphone picture in front of a green screen and a new background...

Image

Again, thank you to all who helped answer my questions. I am fairly new to ship modeling, this being effectively my second ship model...I did build 3 modern nuclear subs, but that's a different ball game.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 140
Location: Austin, TX
Thanks guys - I've been combing through this thread trying to get a handle on things.

The next thing I'm looking for info on is the tall searchlight tower/platform from the early BENSON units - finding any plans of it seems to be impossible; everything online shows the later units and the wartime refits.

Any ideas?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6161
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
ESzczesniak wrote:
Sometime in the next couple weeks I'll set up my "photography studio" and get some quality pictures.

Congrats on finishing her. Just remember to send your photos into the gallery via submissions@modelwarships.com, and/or post them in the "Completed Models" Forum under "Picture Post". We try to keep these CASF threads from growing too large with postings of completed models.

_________________
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: Wed May 24, 2017 3:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Posts: 152
MartinJQuinn wrote:
ESzczesniak wrote:
Sometime in the next couple weeks I'll set up my "photography studio" and get some quality pictures.

Congrats on finishing her. Just remember to send your photos into the gallery via submissions@modelwarships.com, and/or post them in the "Completed Models" Forum under "Picture Post". We try to keep these CASF threads from growing too large with postings of completed models.


Yes, absolutely. The message here was just a quick thank you. The actual photo thread will be in the gallery and/completed models thread.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 3:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 140
Location: Austin, TX
All - the reason for my inquiries is that I've been making some Shipbucket drawings of the various class. Right now I am focused on LAFFEY. I've read through this entire thread and assembled a folder with as many images as possible, but need some help from the experts to confirm a few details.

Image

This is the ship as it would have appeared in September of 1942. Notable features I've assembled:

- Four 5"/38 Mark 12 guns in Mark 30 Mod 0 enclosed base ring type mounts.
- 1.1" Mark 1 quad aft to starboard, with a single 20mm Oerlikon to port.
- 20mm Oerlikon mounts abeam the aft funnel.
- Exposed funnel trunking on the aft stack, with a small catwalk above extending aft to the old #2 torpedo tube mount tower.
- 36" searchlight on the old torpedo tube foundation with tetrahedral riser, on a small platform abot 1' above the catwalk on its portside.
- Ready service cabinets abeam the torpedo tube foundation.
- No Mk.51 director for the aft 1.1" quad.
- Square 02 level on the bridge, with ready service locker ahead.
- .50-cal M2 water cooled machine guns ahead of the pilot house.
- Bridge wings slightly cut down aft, with pipe railing protecting the 24" searchlight operator.
- Thicker Bethlehem type mainmast.
- Small rounded splinter shield protecting the emergency conn.
- Canvas dodger (dyed blue) around the air defense level above the pilot house.
- Mark 37 director with Mod 2-9 "taper back" shield, Mk.3 slewing sight, and Mark 4 "FD" radar on early-type radar supports.

A few questions that arose from this:

1. Have I done the AA fit correctly? I can't tell if the mounts ahead of the pilot house are 20mm Oerlikons or .50-cals, but the smaller size of the splinter shield around it seems to suggest they are .50-cals and not the bigger 20mm.

2. Was a breakwater fitted aft of the first bank of torpedo tubes? On some later photos of BUCHANAN this breakwater is obvious, and it seems to direct water away from the two 20mm tubs abeam the #2 stack. I can't tell from any of the LAFFEY photos if it's present or not.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Cheers
Ian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 5:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 140
Location: Austin, TX
As soon as I posted this, I skimmed back through the thread and found the answer (not sure how I missed it)...

Quote:
Both LAFFEY and WOODWORTH were completed and operated with the one quad 1.1-in mount (in the starboard tub) and one single 20-mm mount (in the portside tub), plus four 20-mm mounts. LAFFEY was lost in this configuration, WOODWORTH was upgraded in May-June 1944 to the standard two twin 40-mm mounts, seven 20-mm configuration.


Corrected here, but this brings me to another question: how were the splinter shields for LAFFEY constructed? They are obviously much smaller than others I've seen.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2017 8:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3048
Ian,

The BENSON-GLEAVES class isn't a monolithic class. There were changes going on all through WWII.

First there were the pre-WWII "Original" six BENSON and eighteen GLEAVES class units (DD-421 through DD-444), ordered in FY 37, FY 38, and FY 39. Then the "Repeat" BENSON and GLEAVES class units (starting with DD-453) were more or less war-built (ordered after WWII started in 1939, but before the USA was involved "officially") with modifications to the original design in FY 40. None completed until early in 1942.

The SIMS, BENSON, and GLEAVES classes were basically built to the same hull design and almost the same armament of five 5-in guns initially and only four 5-in guns (all in fully enclosed shields) for the Repeat BENSON-GLEAVES dual class (SIMS class had quad Torpedo Tube mounts and the other two classes had quint torpedo tube mounts). The major difference between them was the power plant.

The Original BENSON class units were designed by Bethlehem Steel, but only two units were built by a Bethlehem yard (Beth-Quincy) and the remaining four were built by USN Yards. All 30 of the Repeat-BENSON class were built by various Bethlehem yards. The Repeat-GLEAVES class were built by other private and USN yards.

The Original BENSON-GLEAVES dual class units had 50-cal MG AA guns when WWII started for the USA. All of the Repeat-BENSON-GLEAVES dual class had 20-mm guns as completed except for USS BRISTOL which was completed with a similar armament and configuration as the modified Original-GLEAVES class units with twelve 50-cal MGs. The Repeat BENSON-GLEAVES dual class were intended to be armed with two twin 40-mm mounts and four 20-mm guns as completed. But, the twin 40-mm mounts were NOT available as the first units completed early 1942. So a quad 1.1-in mount was substituted on the starboard "tub" intended for one of the twin 40-mm guns mounts and a single 20-mm gun placed in the portside "tub" for about twenty-four units as completed.

Once the twin 40-mm mounts were available and retrofitted to the classes, the number of 20-mm guns were increased as well.

The original "standard" design for the bulwarks on the aft deckhouse for two twin 40-mm mounts and the "Interim" quad 1.1-in mount/single 20-mm looked like this. The elongated bulwark was intended to have the twin 40-mm/quad 1.1-in mount mounted aft and a director Mk 49 or Mk 51 installed in the forward part of the bulwark. Some units had an additional wrap around bulwark between the director and gun mount to further protect the gun mount.

Image

Image

USS LAFFEY (DD-459) was a Repeat-BENSON built at Beth-SF yard.

However, as was the case for the Beth-SF yard, they did things different. Their bulwark design was more conventional with what was being installed on other ships. They had individual bulwarks for both gun mount positions and the directors. This image shows LAFFEY's Beth-SF built sister USS WOODWORTH (DD-460).

Image

USS LAFFEY's aft deckhouse looked like this when she was in the South Pacific;

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2017 12:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 140
Location: Austin, TX
Much appreciated Rick - I can see now that the aft bulwarks for the 1.1" and 20mm on my drawing are the correct type. Thanks!

Still scratching my head about the splinter shields for the 20mm mounts ahead of the bridge. From the one photo I've found it seems they are much smaller than normal. Any ideas?

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2017 12:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3048
The forward 20-mm gun bulwarks evolved. The original bulwarks were pretty much the same as was used for 50-cal MGs on earlier BENSON-GLEAVES class units. By the Summer of 1942 the location and size of these "tubs" was found lacking, the plan was to enlarge and move the 20-mm guns and bulwark platform outboard to allow for a wider arc of fire forward for the 20-mm guns. Because of the urgent need for destroyers in the Pacific, many alterations were put off until a major yard period was required. Some units had this mod done while building, other not. On the Repeat-BENSON-GLEAVES units (NOT on the Original units) an elevated centerline platform was authorized in October 1942, which absolutely required that the 20-mm guns below the platform be moved outboard.

As for most of the ships but in 1942 during a period of rapid changes in armament, sensors, and camo, checking photos is the only way to be positive (without a lot of digging in textual records) to know what a ship was armed with and how it was painted.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2017 11:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 140
Location: Austin, TX
Photo evidence is the only absolute proof I will go with when making these drawings. ;) Never model kit lineart, slapped-together Squadron/Signal profiles, or mass-produced waterline drawings from Conways or Janes. Even the illustrations in Friedman's fall short sometimes. I use Floating Drydock plans to plot (not trace) the base hull and superstructure with correct dimensions (and even find errors in these sometimes) and then add details and make changes based on photo research. This is the only way to produce an accurate drawing. Over the years I've discovered that most of the "trusted" sources available contain many, many errors. I pride myself on producing drawings that are more accurate than anything else I've found...

Anyway, the next project is FARENHOLT as of August, 1942, with its experimental Measure 12 camouflage. Are there any photos of the starboard side available? I have one that I must have pulled from this thread (it's labelled DD492AftDeckhouse-19Jul42), and it looks like a detail shot taken from a larger image.

Image

I have the excellent portside shots of FARENHOLT at this time but am wondering about the stbd side. Any help is appreciated.

Cheers
Ian

edit: I now realize I posted the shot from DD-492 BAILEY (d'oh) - however I also have a closeup (probably also from this thread) of the starboard side of FARENHOLT from April of 42:

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 11:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3048
If you don't have it, I would suggest that you get a copy of Steve Wiper's BENSON-GLEAVES Class Destroyers book, Profile #12 if you plan on doing several of the BENSON-GLEAVES class. There are photos of many of the BENSON-GLEAVES class units in their MS 12R(mod) camo, including USS FARENHOLT. Steve doesn't have as many views as I have located at NARA, but he does have quite a few of the better images.

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1073 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 50, 51, 52, 53, 54  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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