The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:00 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 393 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 1:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:24 pm
Posts: 10
Oops, I see you're looking for the prewar config. My bad.

I didn't know she lacked a 3" AA gun on her fantail. That's news to me. However, Dan Mullins' book states that it was the only larger gun serviceable on the ship at the time of her attack on Dec. 10, if that's any help.
The 4"/50cal MB guns were not, he says.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:53 pm
Posts: 2
Thanks, G-opt for your comments. That picture of Langley from the Whipple is great; it's the one and only image I've ever seen of a .30 on a Clemson. I'd have never guessed that they would squeeze more in on the galley deckhouse. So, I'm tentatively putting one on the aft deckhouse, one on the fire control platform and two amidships a la Whipple. With regard to the .30 mount, I was assuming a pipe mount because that's the only thing I've ever seen illustrated. But the Langley picture is very high resolution and, enlarged on a good monitor the .30 there seems to be on a single pipe but with that pipe on a short little tripod. I don't have your Messimer reference but I'll poke around in Mr. Google and see if I can turn something up. I don't suppose you have a guess as to where the mount would go on the fire control platform, do you? My guess would be starboard since the RFDF antenna is to port.

On the question of a 3" on Peary, my read of p. 38 in Mullin is that he's talking about Pillsbury's armament since that same paragraph says there was one boiler on the line and Peary (with her bow still open) was cold iron.

Bob

p.s. my original post about the .30s was from "bob w" because I was too befuddled to figure out that I needed to sign into my brand new account.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:24 pm
Posts: 10
You are absolutely correct about Mullins--He was talking about DD-227; I missed that.

I have a rare, good-quality shot of DD-226's stern (taken ca. 1940 at Hong Kong) but it doesn't show the pea-shooter mount, just the depth-charges, rack, prop guard, aft name/number, stern light, etc. No question she was in the standard pre-war light gray, as all of them were until very late.
And I see what you mean about that little tripod at the base of the Lewis gun mount. I would not worry about that; the tripod shown in Messimer is totally different; it's definitely not on a fourpiper anyway. In it, the tripod extends up to shoulder level or higher, and there is only a short extension through which the gun itself mounts (on a diagonal.)
The late great Kemp Tolley is a superb resource, though, and the pic below shows a Lewis gun mount much more like the one on Whipple, IMO. This is from p. 264 of YANGTZE PATROL (Naval Institute Press, 1971).
There's another, even better photo of that type of pipe mount in Tolley, p. 206, taken on USS Tutuila, which shows its simple design in more detail. See what you think.

Your guess is as good as mine re the MG on the FC platform...but wherever it was, it was in the way. Although I suspect it was welcome all the same...

Dunno why the pix won't post right side up--but, I'm sure the images are self-explanatory.


Attachments:
Jing bao 001.jpg
Jing bao 001.jpg [ 102.15 KiB | Viewed 974 times ]
USS Tutuila.jpg
USS Tutuila.jpg [ 145.3 KiB | Viewed 974 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
I can't say that it applies to the Asiatic Fleet destroyers because they were so far out on the supply chain that they did a lot of things different, but the US-based Flush-deckers removed the little short 3-in gun "peashooter" so that a "Y-Gun" could be installed on the fantail. Also, I came across a document at NARA saying that the USN wanted to remove that gun from all Flush-Decker destroyers and reallocate them to smaller craft like Harbor Patrol Craft. As an aside, I found a photo of one of the Flush-Deckers with the 5-in guns in Alaska waters with her aft 5-in gun, that was mounted on the main deck, removed and a Y-Gun installed there.

The 30-cal MGs probably were from the ship's allocation of Shore-duty weapons. I really doubt there was much standardization on the locations where they were mounted. Many ships put out EVERY GUN they could get their hands on early in the war before they got enough 20-mm and larger AA-guns to be truly effective.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:24 pm
Posts: 10
Yes, I would've suspected the .30cal guns were their old original Lewis guns. How the MGs were numbered is a bit strange, since it appears the .30cal were separate from the .50cal. mounts.

I dbl-chkd various docs, and if PEARY lacked her 3"/23cal "Poole gun" then she was most likely the only Asiatic fleet fourpiper that did. Action reports, memoirs, etc. show that just about all of the other ships used their 3" at some time or another during the opening mos. of the war. I find it hard to believe anybody was taking guns off those old, anemic ships in 1941 when an imminent war was apparent to everybody out there.
So, wonder why was the 3" removed, or inoperable, on PEARY prior to her yard overhaul in late 1941?

I find reports of the 3" being used by FORD, PARROTT, POPE, PAUL JONES, WHIPPLE, ALDEN, J. D. EDWARDS, EDSALL, PILLSBURY, and STEWART. Haven't looked for anything by BARKER & BULMER, but no reason to doubt they had theirs still.

But, I sure agree that the PacFlt, as noted, was another matter entirely.

The sole meaningful upgrade that the DesRon 29 fourpipers got AFAIK was the Q sound gear. Other than minor upgrades to their radio equipment & adding whatever MGs they could scrounge, they were basically stock 1918-1920 model ships. Fortunately, Cramp & Sons of Philadelphia built very rugged CLEMSONs. Thank goodness for that & their Parsons turbines, which performed better than others (Westinghouse, G.E., Curtis) by an average of ~ 1.11 to 1.50 knots at Full Power.

Additionally, the navy had considered upgrading the flushdeckers' armament as far back as 1922--when Holloway Frost wrote a fine evaluation of them, vis-a-vis their more powerful contemporaries, and made several useful suggestions...none of which were ever undertaken. His paper was shelved in 1924 due to budgetary restrictions, and forgotten. Then, two decades later, when a few of the fourpipers were converted to high speed transports, minelayers/sweeper, etc., some of those very upgrades appeared.

Model building note: if one were to make a pre-war fourpiper, and also include awnings, the Asiatic Fleet tincans marked themselves with large American flags atop their awnings whenever operating along the China coast--much like AUGUSTA did atop her turrets (although they were painted) right up until her departure for CONUS in November 1940.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:53 pm
Posts: 2
G-Opt, would you be able to post that 1940 image from Hong Kong of Peary's fantail?

Bob


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Speaking of Sonar Gear on the DesRon 29 destroyers, one of the documents I came across at NARA was this 9 October 1940 memo listing the various sonar upgrades planned or in process. The DesRon 29 units were Number 1 on the list.

Image

The USN did several studies on proposals to "improve" the AA armament on the Flush-Deckers in the immediate years prior to the USA entry "officially" in WWII. Serious effort went on to install quad 1.1-in mounts. However, due to their age, small size and small size of their electric generating capability (which really doomed installing the quad 1.1-in mounts), there wasn't much that could be accomplished without major rebuilding. As it was the genesis of the studies, resulted in the upgrade for 27 units in 1940-41 with six 3-in/50cal DP weapons formerly used on Battleships and Cruisers prior to their upgrades to 5-in/25cal guns and from older destroyers. This armament change along with addition of more 50-cal MGs (until the 20-mm guns became available) was suppose to address the AA armament shortfall for these units. The program was suppose to continue with the remaining Flush-Decker Destroyers not scheduled for conversion to other purposes. But the USN ran out of available 3-in/50cal guns. Many of the 3-in guns in the USN supply were being installed as "temp" stand-ins for quad 1.1-in mounts on heavy units. As it was the 3-in/50cal DP guns were not terribly effective as AA guns on Flush-Deckers due to a lack of fire control and any means of automatic control of the guns by a fire control system.

DesRon 29 in the Philippines was in the same "boat" as all the US forces in the Philippines up to April 1941, they were always the last to get equipment. Being given the stuff cast off from the services on the mainland, which was first sent to Hawaii and then to the Philippines to be finally exhausted in use there.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 3:46 am 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 384
Location: Roma - Italy
Ciao to all,


I wanted to make the model of the ship USS Ward with this camouflage from I War, or a twin unit always with this type of camouflage.

What colors should I use, armament and other tips

I will use the flyhawk kit.

Thanks
Giampiero


https://www.dropbox.com/s/c0jxte8g1v61a ... 5.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6611jy7k9zrbs ... 9.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pqkg4usfuymig ... 4.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/73ju1dchi9mm4 ... 6.jpg?dl=0


Last edited by Giampiero on Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Giampiero

I don't know the colors used in USS WARD's disruptive camo pattern in WWI.

I suggest that you post just the question about the camo in the Camo forum here. Someone may have researched the colors.

As for her armament, USS WARD (DD-139) as commissioned had the standard armament of four 4-in guns arrangement with the aft 4-in gun on the main deck. The aft 4-in gun would be moved to the aft deckhouse, likely after she painted out of the dazzle camo. I'm not sure where (if installed) her "small" 3-in gun (types varied) for use as an AA gun was located when commissioned in dazzle. After she was painted out of dazzle post-WWI, she had the 4-in gun still on the main deck and had a 3-in gun on the fore deck aft of the 4-in gun.

Rick


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 1:58 pm 
Offline
Regia Marina
Regia Marina
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:08 am
Posts: 384
Location: Roma - Italy
Ciao Rick,

Thanks for the information on the ship's armament guns

I have posted the question about the Forum camouflage for colors used in the USS WARD's disruptive camo pattern in WWI.

Regards
Giampiero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6510
Location: New York City
Today's gallery posting of Dai Tsao's Wickes class Ward with as an experimental weapons platform with the 5"/38 mount up forward is pretty interesting: http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm
Seems like stability issues would play a big role. Was this mount ever a practical consideration?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Simply answer is no.

Five Flush-deckers did have 5-in/51cal SP guns installed as completed (all Flush-deckers were reinforced structurally to have these guns installed). During the late 1920's into the 1930's several proposals to upgrade this class (since there were so many in the inventory) included in one proposal was installing 5-in/25cal mounts. The 5-in/38cal enclosed mount shown would have been quite a bit heavier and involve more modifications below deck. Also, to be effective, a modern fire control system would have been required. The USN didn't like having mixed main gun batteries on destroyers, so if a 5-in gun would have been seriously considered for installation, there would have been no 4-in guns and two or three 5-in/25-cal (or open mount 5-in/38-cal) installed with quite a bit of structural mods required. But, the cost, limited size, and age of the Flush-decker destroyers made it a moot point when compared to new construction. Friedman's USN Destroyer Design book has a discussion on the subject.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6510
Location: New York City
Thx, Rick!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 393 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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