The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:50 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1085 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 55  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:32 pm
Posts: 241
Location: South Carolina
Does anybody know what changes are in the new 1945 version of the Buchanan in the new Dragon release as compared to how she was after the August 1944 refit? I like the 1944 paint scheme much better.

Walt Haynes


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:02 am
Posts: 9849
Location: EG48
If I remember Rick Davis said "Not many" as she didn't go in for overhaul again until after the war was over.

_________________
Tracy White -Researcher@Large

"Let the evidence guide the research. Do not have a preconceived agenda which will only distort the result."
-Barbara Tuchman


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
As Tracy said, Buchanan had no major overhaul or mod's after her mid-1944 overhaul. When she left Mare Island Navy Yard she was painted in a dazzle camo scheme (see photos attached). At some point before the surrender, likely in late 1944 to early 1945, she was repainted into Ms 21. DestroyerHistory.org (also the NHC website has many of these as well) has a series of Tokyo Bay photos of Buchanan although less than being perfect images, should show the changes, if any were made ...
http://www.destroyerhistory.org/benson- ... on484.html ... on a quick look, I don't notice any major differences. Other than that "D". :smallsmile:

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 10:32 pm
Posts: 241
Location: South Carolina
Thanks for the quick reply. You guys make this a really fun enterprise.

Walt


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:59 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 4:31 pm
Posts: 3419
Location: Plattsburg, Missouri
The model of the 45 Buchanan is based on the 44 overhaul. There were no visiable changes other than paint that I was able to find from 44 to 45.

I still don't know what the big D on the top of the bridge was all about at Tokyo Bay. But it appears to be associated with the surrender signing. Possibly to identify Buc as the ship carrying the big dogs. So Dragon was nice enough to include a PE version so you could do a dio with the Missouri if you wanted.
Attachment:
484buchanan_16.jpg
484buchanan_16.jpg [ 90.18 KiB | Viewed 2789 times ]

So will we see a scene like this at next years Nats?

_________________
Timothy Dike
Owner & Administrator
ModelWarships.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:07 am
Posts: 229
Location: Pittsgrove, New Jersey
Tim,

I'm working from memory, but I think that the Squadron Book on the Benson class mentions that the code square 'D' was for Buchanan to act as MacArthur's transfer vessel in Tokyo Bay.

Bob Wescott


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:20 pm 
Hey guys, I have another question about the Gwin. I am trying to determine the shape of the aft deckhouse in '42 when it held 6 50 cal MGs. From looking at the few photos of the Gwin and other ships of the class at the time with similar looking configurations, it almost seems like there were three splinter shields on each side of the deckhouse (one for MG) but I'm not 100%. Is this accurate? I haven't been able to find good photos for determining the shape for this area the ship. Thanks.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
Trevor,

I don't have a photo of Gwin when she had 0.50-cal MG's, but here are snapshots of the aft deckhouse area on four different ships from the early Benson-Gleaves plus Bristol group. In order: Woolsey (DD-437) on 8 September 1941, Wilkes (DD-441) on 28 July 1941, Nicholson (DD-442) on 3 September 1941, and an onboard view of Bristol (DD-453) which was the last Benson-Gleaves ship to be completed (or modified) with 0.50-cal MG's. The first three photos were taken at Boston Navy Yard and the last one at New York Navy Yard. Yards can have different "styles" and I don't know which yard modified Gwin from the as built configuration for sure, but DANFS seems to say Boston. I don't know for sure, but it always seemed to me that the MG's were staggered from port to starboard ... not exactly across from each other. You can see this in the Nicholson and Bristol photos above. I don't have or know of an overhead photo for a Benson-Gleaves armed with 0.50-cal MG's. Maybe someone else does. There are some other photos on Navsource that may be of help for the early Benson-Gleaves with 0.50-cal MG's.

Image

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:34 am
Posts: 5
Thanks again, those pictures were just what I was looking for. I was able to find images that show this structure pre-war as well as in 1943 but none for 42. It seems like these destroyers were always undergoing changes.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
Trevor,

Actually, the authorized armament changes for the Benson-Gleaves dual class was pretty straight forward. The HOW it was done is what is what makes it interesting.

For the early pre-war group: DD422-444,

The gun/torpedo armament was changed on on DesRon 7 ships (DD421-428, 431) to five 5-in., one bank of five torpedo tubes, ten 0.50-cal MG's in June-July 1941. The rest of the pre-war group was changed to four 5-in., two banks (for ten) torpedo tubes, and twelve 0.50-cal MG's. Due to concerns about stability, Plunkett (DD-431) had her 53 mount removed in September 1941.

The armament was further modified for the early group by replacing the MG's with six 20-mm in early 1942. But they replaced the MG's in piecemeal fashion on at least some of the ships ... not all at once. That is why you will see photos with mixed batteries.

Even before the war had started, the ultimate armament for ALL of this group was suppose to be four 5-in., two twin 40-mm, four 20-mm and TEN TT. The supplies of the 40-mm mounts didn't allow upgrades until late 1942 and some of these didn't get the mod until early 1944 ... if they still survived. Some ships didn't get the second bank of TT until early 1945 and then it was removed on many ships when the Anti-Kamikaze boost in AA armament took place.

However, there were some "temporary" armament versions as well. At least three that I know of. Mayo (DD-422) and Plunkett (DD-431) had a quad 1.1-in. mount installed where the 53 mount was located in early 1942 ... making them the only early group destroyers of this class to have the quad 1.1-in. mount. The second temp armament configuration was for the DesDiv 22 ships transferred to the Pacific in early 1942. DD433-436, were modified with nine 20-mm mounts replacing all the 0.50-cal MG's and the starboard boat. The third temp armament was adding a removable platform mounting four 20-mm guns where the aft bank of torpedo tubes would be located. this was done on a few of the ships heading to the Med for Italian and South France operations. I don't have a firm number on HOW many ships actually got this platform. It does not appear to be as many as Friedman lists. I think the ships he lists were authorized, but may not have gotten it.

None of the early group Benson-Gleaves ships ever were authorized or received the elevated centerline 20-mm and platform, as far as I know.

The DD-453 and afterwards units were authorized four 5-in., two twin 40-mm, four - then five - then seven 20-mm guns, and 5 TT. But because the twin 40-mm guns were not available until July 1942, Bristol (DD-453) was completed with four 5-in., twelve 0.50-cal MG's, and five TT. The next 24 or so units (some for only a short period) received a quad 1.1-in. mount in the starboard location intended for one of the twin 40-mm mounts and an additional 20-mm in the port twin 40-mm tub location. This gave these early units five 20-mm guns and 5 TT. The 24 units equipped with the quad 1.1-in. mount received their two twin 40-mm mounts as yard availabilities happened ... unless they were lost first. The installation of seven 20-mm guns was standard, but WHERE they were located was not. The twenty Square Bridge units didn't have bridge wing 20-mm guns and fitted an extra pair amidships.

For all non DMS surviving units in April-May 1945, the anti-kamikaze mod of two quad 40-mm mounts, two twin 40-mm mounts, two twin 20-mm mounts (before the bridge), two single 20-mm mounts (main deck amidships), and NO TT was common for all groups so modified. However, a couple of units got four twin 40-mm mounts instead (at least one of those had 20-mm guns installed on the fantail ... Coghlan (DD-606) ... the only Benson-Gleaves with 20-mm guns located there that I know of).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:25 pm
Posts: 3
Did the Buchanan have the tripod or pedestal mounts for its 20mm Oerlikons in its 1944-45 fit?
And did she ever carry twin 20mm mounts?

Jeff


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 9:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
Jeff,

Buchanan was updated to the tripod mounts for her 20-mm guns and she didn't have twin 20-mm guns while in USN service. Most all USN ships in 1944-45 replaced the earlier "pedestal" mounts with the lighter weight tripod mounts during refits. The only Benson-Gleaves dual class that had twin 20-mm mounts that I'm aware of in WWII were those ships updated with the anti-kamikaze mod (forward of the bridge). Buchanan never had that mod done.

I have not dug into the post-war configuration of those units transferred to foreign governments to say what 20-mm guns were carried.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:25 pm
Posts: 3
What ships had the anti-kamikaze mod? I think it would be interesting to try to modify a kit to represent this. Also, do you have any pictures?

Jeff


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
Jeff,

Friedman and others list the following ships with the anti-kamikaze mod; DD-423, 424, 429-432, 435, 437-440, 443, 497, 600, 601, 603, 604, 608, 610, 612-614, 616-617, 623-624, and 628 had the two quad 40-mm and two twin 40-mm mounts, two twin 20-mm and two single 20-mm mounts, and no-TT. I have not taken the time to verify that all the ships on this list is accurate, but it seems to be. DD-606 and 615 had a different configuration with four twin 40-mm and no-TT. Coghlan (DD-606) had four twin 20-mm mounts; two mounts in front of the bridge and two mounts on the fantail ... the only Benson-Gleaves that I know of with 20-mm guns on the fantail. I'm not sure what the 20-mm guns load-out was on McLanahan (DD-615) ... I only have a 1967 mothball photo of her in this configuration and the 20-mm guns were removed by then.

Here are a few photos of this mod on four Benson's and one of the early Gleaves class.

1) Nields (DD-616) on 21 May 1945 was one of the first four (DesDiv 32) of this dual class to be converted.

2) Grayson (DD-435) on 29 July 1945.

3) Kendrick (DD-612) on 27 June 1945.

4) Gansevoort (DD-608) on 20 August 1945.

5) Coghlan (DD-606) on 2 July 1945 with her non-standard configuration.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:59 pm
Posts: 404
Location: NW Lower Michigan
Hi all,

Just received my Dragon 1:350 Buchanan kit via FedEx... WOW, what a nice kit!!!! I can't wait to start in on it. What is the antenna at the top of the main mast? SC-2? As I look over the fine details of the many many parts and the PE (including the extra railings that I ordered too), I just wonder way that radar antenna at the top didn't come as a PE piece. Such a prominent place for a solid chunk of plastic. Oh well, does anyone know where a person can purchase that antenna without having to buy a whole fret of PE?

Capt652

_________________
Timm Smith
Learn something new about the ship or your job every day. Ignorance is not bliss aboard a warship in wartime. Ignorance could cost the life of yourself, a shipmate, or the loss of the ship.
- Personal Information Booklet CV- 38


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:54 pm
Posts: 38
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Capt652 wrote:
Hi all,

Just received my Dragon 1:350 Buchanan kit via FedEx... WOW, what a nice kit!!!! I can't wait to start in on it. What is the antenna at the top of the main mast? SC-2? As I look over the fine details of the many many parts and the PE (including the extra railings that I ordered too), I just wonder way that radar antenna at the top didn't come as a PE piece. Such a prominent place for a solid chunk of plastic. Oh well, does anyone know where a person can purchase that antenna without having to buy a whole fret of PE?

Capt652

I don't think you can just get the one antenna. Tom's makes a fret of just WW2 US radars, though.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 6:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:44 am
Posts: 3
I have a question about the hull portholes on DD-484. The Dragon box art (1942) does not show them, the pictures I've seen of the 1942 fit are not clear, but they do seem to be gone after the 1944 refit. Can anyone shed some light on this for me please?

-CJ


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 6:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
CJ,

I believe that Tim mentioned this in his review ... but the Buchanan kit's hull is designed to serve many periods for the Benson-Gleaves dual class including pre-WWII when the portholes were there. For the Buchanan, you will need to fill in the portholes since they were plated over or not installed on late production Benson-Gleaves units.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:44 am
Posts: 3
Rick E Davis wrote:
CJ,

I believe that Tim mentioned this in his review ... but the Buchanan kit's hull is designed to serve many periods for the Benson-Gleaves dual class including pre-WWII when the portholes were there. For the Buchanan, you will need to fill in the portholes since they were plated over or not installed on late production Benson-Gleaves units.


Rick,

Thanks for the response. Not sure why I'm letting these portholes drive me nuts.

DD-484 clearly had them when she was launched:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/0548310.jpg

And after looking again, it seems at least one remained on the port side after the 1944 refit:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/0548410.jpg

Hence my confusion. I hate to fill some or all of the ones on the kit (and loose the wonderful eyebrow detail) only to discover later I was wrong. This is my first 1/350 ship kit, and I'm trying to do her up right. :)

-CJ


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3292
After 30 years I finally found photos of those reported single 40-mm mounts on Benson-Gleaves units. While looking for something else in BuShips textual records at NARA last week, I found unexpectedly reference to the single 40-mm mounts on the Lansdale (DD-426) when she was lost. I checked the files for Madison (DD-425) that were available in the same boxes I was looking in and found more references including WHERE the single 40-mm mounts were located. This lead me to go back and look through the photos I had scanned almost 1 and a half years ago now. Bingo.

Friedman and John Reilly had included in their books the fact that 16 early Benson-Gleaves units (DD421-432 and 437-440 + Wainwright) in the Eight Fleet operating in the Med were authorized to have two single 40-mm mounts and that 13-14 actually had them installed. But I could never find any photos or anyone who knew where they were located onboard.

The first image is an overhead view of Niblack (DD-424) on 9 April 1944 off New York harbor.

The second image is a close crop of the area on Niblack where the single 40-mm mounts were mounted on the main deck. What a poor arc of fire for these guns. I never thought that these guns would be located in such a location.

The third image is of Gleaves (DD-423) and shows her single 40-mm mount behide the bulwark and illustrates just how hard these are to locate.

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1085 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 55  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JapLance and 17 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