The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:47 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 56  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Anthony,

Both of these ships had received the Anti-Kamikaze upgrade in 1945. This mod involved several major modifications, the aft twin 40-mm mounts were replaced with two quad 40-mm mounts. The twin 40-mm mounts were relocated amidships replacing the torpedo tubes. The previous single 20-mm guns were removed and a pair of twin 20-mm mounts were installed in front of the bridge behind the 52 mount. Two singe 20-mm guns were added on the main deck forward of the quad 40-mm mounts. The Mk 4 Fire Control Radar on the Mk 37 director was replaced by the Mk 28 Mod 3 radar. The Buchanan 1945 kit will require a fair amount of scratch building to get to this configuration. The quad 40-mm tubs will need to be built up as well as the amidships twin 40-mm tubs, along with the weapons/radars not included in the kit. I'm not an expert on their configuration at the time of transfer to Greece, but I would guess there were few changes made initially. Since you already know that they returned to the USA for a refit in 1954, that is likely when the radar, etc was updated. For additional photos, try to find old Jane's Fighting Ships manuals and look on-line at sites like Navsource.org and try Googling the ships names. Good luck. I have posted a few images earlier in this thread showing typical Anti-Kamikaze mod alterations.

Eberle (DD-430) was one of five Benson-Gleaves units that served as a Naval Reserve Training (NRT) ship in the 1946-50 period. This image shows her while serving as a NRT ship.

Image

Ludlow (DD-438) also was a NRT ship until being transferred to Greece. This photo shows her in June 1945 after her Anti-Kamikaze upgrade.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:15 am
Posts: 258
Location: Athens, Greece
Rick,
Thank you very much. You have given me more than I expected, and definitely enough to begin planning my build. I really appreciate the time you have put into this thread, but I am afraid that the only thing I think I can do to reciprocate your kindness will be to post pictures of the completed model in the Gallery!
Best regards
Anthony

_________________
Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything.
Wyatt Earp


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:32 pm
Posts: 279
Location: South Carolina
Tim, thanks for the update. Appreciate all you have contributed.
Walt


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 5:49 pm
Posts: 1354
Location: The beautiful PNW
Found this while researching something else. It's a few minute video of divers on the wreck of the USS Aaron Ward DD-483, shows some of the details of AW's unique refit after her Guadalcanal damage. The water is very clear and she looks to be in a fair condition for a ship that sunk 65 years ago in battle, I know most of her damage was below the waterline but still. Curious thing is the divers only found 1 torpedo in the tubes, where did the others go I wonder?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE4Jz4NQ_hU

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 7:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 358
Location: West Chester, PA
Does anyone have any info on the USS Quick, DD-490 circa 1942? I have 4 shots that show her starboard camo scheme, but I'd like to get a photo showing her port side. I'd also like to confirm that her armamanet suite was the same as the Buchanan, with 5 20mms and one quad 1.1 gun. Any help would be greatly appreciated. :wave_1:

_________________
Bob Cicconi


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Bob,

I have scanned eleven photos of Quick (DD-490), but none of them show the port side ... sorry. But, I can answer the question about her armament. Quick was delivered on 2 July 1942 without any medium AA guns in place. Shortly afterwards at New York Navy Yard she was one of the first destroyers in the class armed with twin 40-mm gun mounts. In the first two attached images (July 1942), the twin 40-mm mounts are installed and she has four 20-mm guns. She was still painted in Ms 12R on 18 July 1942. Likely she repainted into Ms 22 in September-October 1942 before Operation Torch.

What is interesting in the July 1942 photos is that her Mk 51 directors have yet to be installed. Likely they got installed with-in a week or two after this photo. The splinter protection for the twin 40-mm mounts was similar to what Federal had been installing on the Gleaves class ships they had been delivering since DD-483. The inner tub bulwark installed for the quad 1.1-in mount was also installed on the portside.

The third image shows Quick on 23 January 1943 after a elevated platform with 20-mm gun has been added before the bridge. Her bridge wings have been altered for 20-mm guns, but they are not yet installed. The "tubs" for the twin 40-mm mounts have been altered from the July 1942 photos. The inner tub splinter bulwark has been removed. So, the 1942 Buchanan kit could be used for this ship, but you will need two twin 40-mm mounts and need to make other modifications dependent on which date you want to build her to. I didn't make an inventory of other differences between Buchanan and Quick.


Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 358
Location: West Chester, PA
Rick: Thanks for that info! That will help me a lot! I didn't know that she had 2 40mm guns in the rear tubs. That's more critical to me than the camo scheme, as I can just make a mirror image of the starboard side. Thanks again! :thumbs_up_1:

_________________
Bob Cicconi


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: USS Gwin
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:15 am
Posts: 597
Location: England
Does anyone know what radars USS Gwin would have been carrying around the time of Midway? Also their locations?

thanks
Mike


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Mike,

I don't have a photo of Gwin in that time frame, but here is a close crop of Monssen (DD-436) one of her DesDiv sisters taken in May 1942. This photo has been published before, I'm trying to get a better resolution of this image for illustration. The second image is of the mast area. This may be as close as we can get right now, least-ways in what I can find in my scans or on-line. It appears she has the standard SC radar.

The DesDiv 22 ships (DD 433-436) were authorized on 19 May 1942 an armament of nine 20-mm guns, but as best I can tell none of them got it before Midway. Grayson was updated at Mare Island in May-June 1942 (Navsource has photos) and the other three appear to have been modified at Pearl Harbor in Jun-July period post-Midway. Before the upgrade to nine 20-mm guns, these ships had a mix bag of 20-mm and 50-cal MG's. It appears from records that Gwin had two 20-mm guns and eight 50-cal MG's before getting the nine 20-mm MOD. The most LIKELY (I'm not sure about it) locations for the 20-mm guns is on the aft deckhouse between the two MG's remaining there per side. I base that on how the 20-mm guns have been installed on Monssen, which also was listed at the time as having two 20-mm guns and eight 50-cal MG's. Normally, the Atlantic based early Benson-Gleaves units (DD 421-444) would remove the four MG's before the bridge and atop the pilothouse and replace them with two 20-mm guns before the bridge. But, the Pacific based ships followed different logic in not wanting to give up any guns ... this view of Monssen shows TEN MG's. See the third image. Lacking any photos of Gwin that can show this kind of detail ... this would be my BET (fingers crossed) as to her configuration at Midway.


Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:15 am
Posts: 597
Location: England
Thanks - I can't see an SG on the mast as yet, unless i'm blind! Thanks for the info on the AA - I thought it had 2 20mm and 8 0.5's but wasn't 100% on their location. One other thing I've thought of is I have seen pics of Gwin in her 1943 refit showing a totally open 5' 38cal aft, (the super-imposed mount). Now usually these pics have circles showing the changes that happened during the refit, in this case 2 twin bofors plus directors but no circle on the 5' mount. Was Gwin carrying an open 5' mount at Midway?

thanks
Mike


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Mike,

I can not be 100% certain, but these four destroyers arrived in the Pacific with their half shields (canvas covers) and Grayson retained it after her 1942 refit to nine 20-mm and AFTER her 1943 refit with twin 40-mm mounts. As late as April 1944, Grayson still had her shield on 53 mount. Gwin didn't show it in the Mare Island Yard views. But, I suspect that she still had it at Midway and if she did have it removed before her Mare Island refit ... it was removed when she got nine 20-mm guns. That is my opinion. You could make up two 53 gun mounts ... one with and one without the shield and if ever a photo surfaces ... switch if you/we guessed wrong :smallsmile:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:15 am
Posts: 597
Location: England
Thanks I will do that.
I have another question. I'm also doing USS Barton as at Santa Cruz. My question is - would she have been fitted with twin bofors by that time or would she still be carrying a quad 1.1'?

thanks
Mike


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:33 pm 
Offline
Back-Aft Models
Back-Aft Models

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:44 am
Posts: 2818
Location: Omaha, NE, USA
If anyone needs replacement parts for their DRAGON USS Buchanan, I have a kit that I'm using mostly for parts for my current build, i.e. the chocks and bitts and winch and vent stacks.

Just let me know!

_________________
Carl Musselman

Image

My Photo Album


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Mike,

Barton (DD-599) very likely was not updated to the two twin 40-mm configuration before her loss. She was delivered in May 1942 and departed the East Coast for the Pacific on 23 August 1942. She had no yard period long enough to be upgraded after leaving the East Coast. And the timing is wrong for her to be updated before leaving and again there was no time (see the NNHC updated version of DANFS entry below). The first twin 40-mm mount installed on a destroyer was on 1 July 1942 and were in short supply until the end of the year. The available twin 40-mm guns were being installed on new construction and few were used initially to update units with "something" ... the quad 1.1-in mount. The 24 Benson-Gleaves units completed with the quad 1.1-in mounts in February-June 1942, generally kept them for a number of months or even years, with most of the Atlantic units being upgraded to 40-mm guns in December 1942 - January 1943 after Operation Torch. The 12 Pacific units with quad 1.1-in mounts were slower at being upgraded, with three (Laffey, Duncan, and Barton) being lost with the quad 1.1-in mount. Buchanan and Woodworth were not updated until early 1944!! Caldwell was the only exception in that she was delivered by Bethlehem - SF yard with a quad 1.1-in mount in June 1942 (the last destroyer of the dual-class delivered with a quad 1.1-in mount) and was updated in August 1942.

The first Barton (DD 599) was laid down on 20 May 1941 at Quincy, Mass., by the Bethlehem Steel Co.; launched on 31 January 1942; sponsored by Miss Barbara Dean Barton, granddaughter of Rear Admiral Barton; and commissioned at the Boston Navy Yard on 29 May 1942, Lt. Comdr. Douglas H. Fox in command.

Barton arrived at Newport, R.I., on 18 June 1943 and reported for duty with the Atlantic Fleet. Following a brief shakedown in Casco Bay, Maine, the new destroyer operated locally through late July escorting Salinas (AO 19) to Portland, Maine, on 29 June and the new battleship Massachusetts (BB 59) to Hampton Roads. On 2 August Barton reported to the Commander, Eastern Sea Frontier, for temporary duty. She carried out antisubmarine patrols between Point Lookout and Cape Henry from 4 to 8 August, before escorting New York (BB 34) to New York City. Barton then sailed to Boston and accompanied Savannah (CL 43) to Norfolk.

Convoying Massachusetts to Casco Bay, in company with O'Bannon (DD 450) and Nicholas (DD 449), Barton then rendezvoused with Nicholas Meade (DD 602), and Washington (BB 55) at New York, and sailed for the Pacific on 23 August. Transiting the Panama Canal at the end of August, Barton steamed with Task Group (TG) 2.12 to the Tonga Islands, arriving at Tongatabu on 12 September. Later, she moved on to Noumea, New Caledonia.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:49 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 4:31 pm
Posts: 3459
Location: Plattsburg, Missouri
It looks like you can model the Barton using the Laffey kit. You will need to relocate the searchlight to the aft superstructure and do some cutting on the shields around the gun tubs.

_________________
Timothy Dike
Owner & Administrator
ModelWarships.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:15 am
Posts: 597
Location: England
I'm using the skywave 1/700 kits sorry - I should have made that clearer. The model is mostly complete so I can't correct too much i may have done wrong! I only have 1 picture of the Barton and the searchlight is not too clear. Now I'm guessing when you say the searlight is on the aft superstructure, you mean its just forward of the small mast? Also was it on any kind of stand or just mounted directly on the deck?
thanks
Mike


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2009 9:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Mike,

Here is an image of Barton as delivered that may be better than the ones on Navsource, that should answer your questions about location of the searchlight (on the aft deckhouse) and the shape of the tubs on the aft deckhouse.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3426
Mike,

I forgot in last night's post to add that the aft deckhouse configuration for Barton's tubs, etc "should" resemble Woodworth's (another Bethlehem built Benson sister) on this thread on page 3. It can't be a "blanket" assumption that ALL Bethlehem-built Bensons were configured like this once the USN Home Navy Yard for the ship completed the ship. The Bethlehem splinter bulwarks appear to be the original heavier gage specified but to a different shape or style from the rest of the Benson-Gleaves builders. The USN changed the spec's for the bulwarks to a "lighter/less armored(?)" gage to save weight. Checking photos, if they exist for periods of interest, to verify configuration is best. Barton has few photos since she was lost about two months after arriving in the Pacific war zone and I have noticed that the BuShips people seemed to PURGE photos of ships lost from their files ... not always and the photos can be found elsewhere, but it is frustrating.

Also, there are photos (I have not scanned them yet, but they can be seen on Navsource) of Laffey that also had this general configuration ... but pay attention to differences. The searchlight was not installed on the aft deckhouse on Woodworth or Laffey or the West Coast built Bethlehem Bensons. This is something I'm unsure of on Barton, in that she was delivered with the searchlight on the aft deckhouse, but Boston Navy Yard "could" have relocated it to the location aft of the second stack. But that is very unlikely, since the sister before her (Bancroft) and after her (Boyle) retained the aft deckhouse location for the searchlight after departing Boston. In January 1943, Boyle had her searchlight moved forward off the aft deckhouse. If you check photos of Boyle, she was configured with the same bulwark shapes for her twin 40-mm mounts as was installed originally on the non-Bethlehem built ships.

This dual-class is pretty frustrating to make blanket assumptions about configurations. It almost seems they are 96 ships with about 300 configurations. :smallsmile:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:15 am
Posts: 597
Location: England
I know what you mean. I copied the the configuaration from the USS McCalla, which I have the drawings for in the warship pictorial book. This means the aft deckhouse is wrong but having said you don't get anything like that in the kits, so I will have to accept that it is incorrect (especially as its stuck together and painted now!). I can move the searchlight though to the correct place as that doesn't require rebulding the entire rear superstructure!

thanks
Mike


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:15 am
Posts: 597
Location: England
Looking at the photos you mentioned on page 3 - if you scan down to the close up pic off USS Kalk showing the area in question, that's what I have done as it's the nearest the kit provides the parts for. It looks to me that the Barton's deck was the same shape but the aa guns and directors had separate splinter shields as oppose to how it was on Kalk. Now I'm asking myself do I modify it or not!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 56  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 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

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