The Ship Model Forum

The image of USS LIVERMORE (DD-429) shows her in her post Anti-Kamikaze Mod in the summer of 1945, likely dating in June 1945. You can see the two quad 40-mm mounts aft and the two twin 40-mm mounts amidships that replaced ALL of her torpedo tubes. Also, she has the Mk 28 radar on her Mk 37 director. I wish I knew where this image came from, because I have not located it at NARA or elsewhere. Which is weird because she was modified at NYNY at the same time as her sister in May-June 1945 and post-refit photos of her are available.

USS LIVERMORE would have been painted the same as her sister, USS EBERLE (DD-430), Ms 21 because they were both assigned to the odd numbered DesRon 11. Whether she was painted with older 5-N purple-blue or newer #7 5-N Neutral Gray paint can be debated. This photo of USS LIVERMORE seems to either have been taken backlit to the sun or is a multiple copy from the original photo when compared to the USS EBERLE image below. I would guess the odds are greater that LIVERMORE and EBERLE are painted in Neutral Gray #7.

USS LIVERMORE and her sister were ordered to the Pacific, but didn't reach the war zone until the war was over.

DANFS entry; Though she departed New York 22 June, V-J Day found her still training at Pearl Harbor. She reached Japan 27 September escorting transports carrying soldiers of the Army's 98th Division for occupation duty.

many thanks Rick! Always precious and precise

I am pretty sure the answer is "yes", but want to confirm... Were Laffey's portholes all plated over by November, 1942?

_________________
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

Well, at least some were NOT plated over. The exact number and locations can be disputed.

Here are a couple of the last images of USS LAFFEY (DD-459) in September 1942, some portholes appear to be open and others could be simply closed with the cover in place or plated over.

In this 4 September 1942 image of USS LAFFEY, I have adjusted the contrast, etc to try and pull out the portholes;



This image was taken on 16 September 1942.



And here is an image of her near identical sister, USS WOODWORTH (DD-460) on 13 August 1942. She still has all of her above the main deck portholes in place.

Excellent - thanks Rick.

_________________
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

Working on some great new accessories for the Gleaves class-




2 Different Styles of Square Bridge available in 1/350 and 1/700.

Latest print with heightened MK37 Barbette fitted with Dragon 5/38 and MK37



Conversion parts to turn your Dragon 1/350 Livermoore into a USS Monssen in late 42

More exciting stuff to come!

Matt

_________________
In the yards right now:
USS Utah AG-16
On Hold
1/350 USS Portland CA-33 1942
1/350 Trumpeter Texas with a twist

Oh yeah! When will the conversion parts to make the 1/350 Monssen be available?

_________________
Fred Sirois
Tace et Exemplar Aedifica

Matt,

That Nine 20-mm configuration was also installed on the other DesDiv 22 sisters, (DD-433 through 436) not just MONSSEN.

There are some other possible useful configuration ideas, first in my mind is the aft deckhouse for the 50-cal MGs installed in mid-1941 and only slowly replaced with 20-mm guns in early 1942. There were two configurations, one for the DesRon 7 units (five 5-in guns, 5-TT, 10-MGs) and one for the remaining units of the early group (four 5-in guns, 10-TT, 12-MGs).

Rick

Hoping to have final release and availability of them by the end of this month. Watch the Manufacturer’s section of this message board for official release info.



Thanks Rick!

Matt

_________________
In the yards right now:
USS Utah AG-16
On Hold
1/350 USS Portland CA-33 1942
1/350 Trumpeter Texas with a twist

Gents,

I wonder if anyone here would have high res versions of images 1 and 2 below (especially 1) of USS Aaron Ward DD483 (post and pre refit pics respectfully) that they would be kind enough to send me offline? (I'd say 'post here' but the size limit here seems to be limited to a mere 400kb.)

I cant do much in exchange, except post some u/w images of her wreck taken back in the mid 90's not long after her discovery, when she was still looking like a fine DD (well, with a bent 'tail' and a few holes in her hull of course), that is long prior to all her upper-works collapsing into the sad and sorry pile of rubble she is today.

BTW; the 'two in one image' below is just a 'crop' of 1 and 2 I made up to compare the pre and post refit differences.

Any help would be much appreciated.

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

Kevin,

I have scanned those images at NARA II, College Park, MD, plus three other images taken off Oahu dated 27 January 1943 (I learned that the dates the PHNY put on the images taken in 1942-43 by USN Patrol aircraft off Hawaii, may not be the exact days when the photos were taken). I have posted at least three of these elsewhere in I think this thread back in late 2008. I have reposted them below, including a close up overhead view of the bridge, along with newly uploads of the same images close cropped (Photobucket and Modelwarships size "rules" were different in 2008 when I uploaded these then). These images aren't going to be as high-res as what I scanned, for that matter not as high-res as I would scan prints these days (I scanned these images back in 2007). But, in this case, I don't think it will make much difference given that the original photos were not the highest quality photography to begin with. Doubling the res wouldn't give you much more details.

What PHNY did on this GLEAVES class destroyer was "technically" what was authorized, but not to the authorized configuration-wise structurally. Note the clipping room added under the centerline 20-mm gun forward of the bridge and the "towers" that the Mk 51 directors would installed in.

As you can see in the blown-up view of the bridge, trying to figure out some details is next to impossible (is that a gun or a sailor? ).

Thanks for those Rick! Much appreciated. I hadn't seen that overhead one before.

As for your comment "As you can see in the blown-up view of the bridge, trying to figure out some details is next to impossible (is that a gun or a sailor?)"

Not exactly sure which of those blurry shapes you refer to, but am sure you know - but for the benefit of others - there were 5 x 20mm surrounding the bridge. The two u/w photos below were taken in IIRC, 1995 and 1998, or circa there abouts. The two 20mm on the aft bridge wings (positions 3 and 5) were 'there' but already 'hanging down' so to speak, as became #1 by circa 1998 IIRC. (There were then two more adjacent to the aft funnel, making for a total of seven 20mm when sunk.) Unfortunately now - well, for many many years now - there is none, repeat none of the bridge standing whatsoever. It is just a pile of rubble, literally, on the deck as it were.

Also below is a photo of the torp tubes. As anyone who has read her AAR knows, she had a hot run in the port tube caused by the shock from the very near miss bomb port abeam, which caused it to 'eject' but was stopped when it hit the back of the forefunnel(!). The photo below shows that torp sticking out of the tube (the funnel having already collapsed by time the photo was taken.)

Anyway, I am not a modeller, so I wont bore you all with u/w photos of the wreck (although I think I may have posted some here before?), but if anyone would like to see a few more, then just ask.

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

Kevin,

From the other images and knowing the general configuration of the class, I knew what was what ... mostly. I was just pointing out that higher-res scans on these prints wasn't going to provide much more details. The grouping of three-four sailors on the starboard side of the pilothouse roof, looks close to the canvas covered 20-mm guns before the bridge.

By the way, do you happen to have images of USS MONSSEN wreck's fantail area? Right now I'm not sure of the wreck's depth without hunting for that info, to know if she is "dive-able". Chuck Haberlein (formerly NHC) has said that there was a 20-mm gun added on the main deck in that area, besides the nine other 20-mm guns she had onboard. He can't provide images because they belong to the Ballard exhibition. Ok not likely you could have dived on MONSSEN, she lays at 2,000-ft depth.

Unfortunately Rick, I can't help you with a pic of the 20mm on Monssen's stern, as as you saw, she is way too deep for scuba divers. Deepest wreck I dived / has been dived there in IBS, is USS Atlanta in 130m/430ft (we were first to scuba dive her back in 1995, and she still gets the occasional visit today). But we did sonar locate what we believe to be one of the APD's (either USS's Little, Gregory or Calhoun) in about 180m / 600ft of water, but did not have the technology (or the cojones) at the time to attempt to dive it, as we were still using open circuit scuba then. Once closed circuit rebreathers became common for deeper diving - and I used one myself till I hung up my fins recently - it is certainly a diveable wreck, but for very very experienced divers only of course. However, first someone has to relocate it, dive an ID whatever wreck it was we located back in circa 1997. I just never got back to Guadalcanal after I moved my focus to SE Asian wrecks, so whatever it is it still sits there undived.

Anyway, back to rarely seen 20mm's. While not on a DD, below is a pic of an oft debated one - as no 'above water' pics exist / or have appeared of same - on the very bow tip of the wreck of HMNZS Moa (buried into the mud in Tulagi Harbour). Certainly not a standard regulation issued / installed item, but by all historical accounts, shortly before her sinking, was 'acquired' from the 'dry' USN when, greased by two bottles of gin, it mysteriously slipped off the back of a USN truck

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

Kevin,

The early period of the SOLOMONS campaign saw a frantic effort to add to Air Defense armament. There are several examples of ships with "extra" authorized and unauthorized 20-mm guns being added. In one FLETCHER class destroyer War Diary, I read that a PacFlt directive went out in October 1942 allocating "AN"extra 20-mm gun to units with six or fewer 20-mm guns onboard. What happened was the distribution of multiple 20-mm guns on a wide scale at the forward bases and installed by the ship's crews, wherever they could find a "likely" location, beyond what was intended. Where these extra guns were located isn't known for all the destroyers in service during that period. Also, I have read that Army air-cooled 50-cal MGs were also added to a ship'ss "unofficial" armament. Once these units returned for overhauls, the unauthorized "weapons" were removed.

I'm pretty much a newby to ship modeling but I picked up the Dragon 1/350 Buchanan when it was first released, along with the extra PE set. I would like to do an Atlantic based destroyer and wonder if this kit could be built as one out of the box or with a minimum of modification. Any help would be very much appreciated. Thank you!

Michael

Michael,

I don't know which BUCHANAN kit you have, the 1942 one or 1945 one. The 1945 kit has more options available with I believe all the parts for the 1942 version plus the 1945 configuration. I will try to give you a list of options based on first the 1942 version of the kit and then add that most of those and other units could also be modeled with the 1945 kit. The DML BENSON and GLEAVES class kits have a lot of common parts, but depending on the specific ship called out "on the box", not all the optional parts for other units may be available. Examples, would be the lack of 40-mm guns for early versions of any of these units. Boxes labeled as 1945 do have twin 40-mm mounts.

First off, the 1942 BUCHANAN kit shows a typical Repeat-GLEAVES class (DD-453 and higher) unit sent to the Pacific with a single quad 1.1-in mount. Other Repeat-GLEAVES class units also armed with the quad 1.1-in mount were operated in the Atlantic with most of them being deployed to Operation Torch off North Africa. But, in fact there wasn't much difference between Pacific-based and Atlantic-based units until local alterations started to appear in the Pacific, which are not reflected in the DML 1942 kit. A total of 24 Repeat BENSON-GLEAVES dual class units were completed with the quad 1.1-in before the planned twin 40-mm mounts were available for installation in July 1942. Units with the quad 1.1-in mounts didn't immediately get upgraded to the two twin 40-mm configuration until after Operation Torch. Actually, the Pacific-based units retained the quad 1.1-in mount longer than the Atlantic-based units.

Repeat-GLEAVES class units with a quad 1.1-in mount in the Atlantic were;

DD-454 ELLYSON - Federal built
DD-455 HAMBLETON - Federal built
DD-456 RODMAN - Federal built
DD-457 EMMONS - BIW built
DD-458 MACOMB - BIW built
DD-461 FORREST - BosNY built
DD-462 FITCH - BosNY built
DD-463 CORRY - ChNY built
DD-464 HOBSON - ChNY built
DD-632 COWIE - BosNY built
DD-640 BEATTY - ChNY built

Configuration "details" varied by yard where the units were built and generally were the same or nearly the same for the units built at the same yard. USS BUCHANAN was a Federal-built unit and I have labeled which units above were also built by Federal. However, some units of the Federal-built Repeat-GLEAVES class units had the original "rounded-face" to the 02 level of the bridge (same deck as the 52 mount was on), which USS BUCHANAN was one. All of the Atlantic based units above had the "square-face" to 02 level of the bridge. The kit comes with both options.

If you bought the 1942 version of the USS BUCHANAN kit, the above list are your options of modeling with most accuracy. However, you can model the others, but should consulate photos to note differences. One noticeable difference is the location of the searchlight, aft of the second stack or on the aft deckhouse.

All of these units were upgraded to the two twin 40-mm configuration late 1942-early 1943. At about the same time, three 20-mm guns were added (one on an elevated platform forward of the bridge and two in bridge wings), making a total of seven 20-mm guns. The remaining units of the Atlantic-based Repeat-GLEAVES class units were completed with two twin 40-mm mounts. The list below does NOT include the 20 Square-Bridge Repeat-GLEAVES class units which the BUCHANAN kit and any of the DML kits, DO NOT include. (However, a 3-D printed Square-Bridge has recently became available)

DD-489, DD-490, DD-633, DD-634, DD-635, DD-636, DD-637, DD-638, DD-639, and DD-641.

There were also a number of Repeat-BENSON class units that can be modeled from this kit since the kit comes with the BENSON class stacks ... but the BUCHANAN kit may not have all the optional parts needed to be completely "accurate".

OH ... A NOTE!!! If you are building a unit with a quad 1.1-in mount, ONLY install ONE Mk 51 director directly forward of the quad 1.1-in mount. Actually, from the photos I have scanned, I "think" only the Atlantic-based units had Mk 51 directors installed just prior to Operation Torch. The Pacific-based units don't appear to have gotten directors for their 1.1-in mounts and relied on local control.

As far as camo schemes used, the early Repeat-GLEAVES (and BENSON's) units were painted in Ms 12R(mod) then starting in August 1942, new-built and overhauled units started to be painted in Ms 22 or for a few in Ms 18, for service in the Atlantic. There was a mass repainting to Ms 22 (and Ms 18 for a few) of the majority of units involved with Operation Torch in September and October 1942. Ms 22 was the standard camo for Atlantic Fleet until late 1944 when dazzle became the standard.

PS. Once you figure out which ship and timeframe you wish to model, I may be able to help you with more info and images.

Rick,

This is great info, thanks! I have the first boxing of the kit, the 1942 version. Let me do some looking at your list and I'll see if I can narrow down my choice.

Michael

Rick,

After looking at the info on DANFS, The Destroyer History Foundation, and NavSource, I think Rodman, DD456 fits the bill. From the few photos I've seen, the configuration sure looks like the 1942 Buchanan in the Dragon kit, and she was on the N. Atlantic convoy runs as well as the Russian convoys, so that's what I was looking for. I do note that your post above says that the bridge was square faced on Rodman as opposed to round faced on Buchanan, but the launch pictures I see on NavSource sure look round to me. Maybe I'm missing something. It looks like the searchlight platform and perhaps the aft deck house might be different, but it's hard to tell the time frame of many of the pictures I'm seeing.

Any further help would be much appreciated!

Michael

Though this picture, borrowed from the Destroyer History Foundation's site on Rodman, looks very similar when blown up, including the searchlight platform and aft deck house. The mizzen mast is truncated, however.



Michael