The Ship Model Forum

Hi guys,

I am building the Revell kit with Eduard and Nautilus sets. Nautilus set is more accurate in most aspects, though the photo etched parts are a bit stiff to work with. Here is the gun director I completed so far. Please do comment.

Regards,

Douglas

Great looking director, Douglas. Keep the pictures coming.

_________________
Gordon


"Then there was one patched-up carrier...."
Vice Admiral Thomas A. Kinkaid

Douglas,

I'm impressed. Keep it up. I'll be keeping a watch on this one for sure.

Regards
Steve

Douglas,

I hate to do this since you have done a SUPERB job on your Mk 37 director, but I have to point out that the radar you have used is not the Mk 4 as used on the early FLETCHERS. The array you have in the center of the array wasn't used on the early Mk 4 and I believe was only used on the Mk 12 radar. The Mk 12 radar started to be installed in late 1943 on some FLETCHERS and a few months later the Mk 22 "orange peel" radar was added to the Mk 12 radar on the Mk 37 director. I only recently found out that the Mk 12 was installed without the Mk 22 (on BELL (DD-587) and a couple of others). You have a remarkable array here and I don't know what to tell you to do.

The model kit manufacturers have messed this up as well, DML has supplied arrays better suited for the Mk 12 radar for their BENSON-GLEAVES kits, however NO BENSON-GLEAVES unit ever had the Mk 12 installed. The BENSON-GLEAVES Mk 37 directors were the early tapered back type and there was no room for the Mk 12 radar.

FLETCHER (DD-445) on 15 July 1942 with her newly installed Mk 4 radar.


JENKINS (DD-447) on 2 September 1943 showing her Mk 4 radar about a year after she was completed.


La VALLETTE (DD-448) in October 1942 as completed with her Mk 4 radar.


HAZELWOOD (DD-531) on 24 June 1943 with her Mk 4 radar pointing up.


HOWORTH (DD-592) on 2 July 1945 showing the late war Mk 12/22 combo on the Mk 37 director.


TINGEY (DD-539) on 30 August 1945 showing the front of the Mk12/22 combo on her Mk 37 director.

Catching my breath here............

OK Rick, as I'm building an early Fletcher as well...........indeed, THE Fletcher in 144.........you said more than a mouthfull there.

Let me see if my mind can "fidder" this out.

1. I'm using the Nautilus PE also.
2. From your photos, If I (we) left out that center array, It might be "close enough for government work"? The 4 frames surrounding the main array PE is a tadd different from that in the photos.
3. Douglas did such a good job on his...........if it were mine........I'd leave it as it really looks great.

Regards
Steve

Actually Doug's Mk 37 would look great on a late war Round bridge FLETCHER or if the director is removeable from the base, look good on a GEARING (with some mods) ... with the addition of a Mk 22.

The point is that the array designs were different and not much attention has been paid to it by manufacturers.

I forgot to mention that the extensions on the back of the Mk 37 director were associated with the Mk 12/22 radar.

Any modeler can do anything he likes. I certainly wouldn't scrap this beauty. It just depends on how accurate he desires to represent CHEVALIER.

Thank you for the compliments from you all !! I am honoured, it is only I built a Mk 37 director instead of a Mk 4 one !!

But now..... shxx..................what should I do..................I might leave it as what Steve said............... or to go for a late war round bridge Fletcher........... or doing more to build a square bridge late model...............ah ya...........why didn't they manufacture it good so we could relax and enjoy the build !!!

Regards,

Douglas

The 5 inch gun here.

Hello Douglas,

Very nice work!

Cheers,

Bill

Rick,

I don't have the nomenclature down pat yet..........so bear with me.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not resisting your input. I'm just a slightly confused modeller. Finding photos of the time period desired and accessory availability is also an issue. I don't plan on sratchbuilding the parts.........at least not complicated parts as the Antenna Aray is. Modification is of course a possibility.

What I'm asking is: What gets me the closest to an early Fletcher antenna aray given the Nautilus PE? Given the photos you posted, they are similar to the Nautilus PE but not spot on. I see areas that "could" be modified", but then again PE is PE and is difficult enough (for me anyway).

I will say this Rick...............you have got me diving into my reference material deeper. Not that my unpracticed eye will catch everything.

I want to thank you again for posting the photos and pointing out the differences.

Regards
Steve

Douglas,

Even the super enlarged photos do the gun justice. Good clean work.

Regards
Steve

I did the search light platform but I found that the Nautilus parts do not assembled a direct replacement of the plastic part. I need to cut down the rear funnel in order to slide the photo etched platform assembly into the slot on the rear funnel. Also, I need to bend the inner most braces. I am starting to doubt if the Nautilus set has been thoroughly tested to fit the Revell kit.

Regards,

Douglas

I don't think the Nautilus searchlight platform is correct. Looking at pictures, most of the braces appear to be I-beams. The Revell part is more correct. I ended up using my set as a template and built the braces out of styrene.

_________________
Any ship larger than a Destroyer is a waste of metal.

Steve,

I actually have not gotten the Revell 1/144 scale kit, I'm unsure I want to get that super-sized kit. I have more 1/350 scale Tamiya FLETCHER kits than I care to remember and didn't find it worthwhile to get the Revell kit in basically the same configuration with fewer options than Tamiya.

I'm thinking about maybe getting the post-war German Z-1 kit ... that is SOMETHING NEW.

Bottom-line, I don't have any 1/144 scale PE sets for any ship and I have not looked at the set. I don't know if Nautilus has optional Mk 4 and Mk 12 antennas. I hope they do, but I just don't know.

I'm on the road for work this week and have limited access to the web to do research on the PE sets.

I took a look at the instructions that are posted on their site, and it appears that there is not. However, it looks like you can omit some parts to the Mk 12 (the two center rear brackets and the small array attached to the front of the main array) and have a reasonable facsimile of a Mk 4? Not sure if the outer brackets' shapes are similar enough for that though.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

It looks to me that the Eduard set is more than enough for building an early model.

Regards,

Douglas

Well, for me, Rick and others in here have been a great source for both pertinant information and motivation. It's always one of these............ When I finally cut plastic or PE AND glue....only to get the "latest" bit of new info.

But then............thats why Naval ships during WWII are such a challenge to build even remotely correct. They changed daily!

And Douglas, your build is giving me the swift kick to get moving again on my Flecther.

Regards
Steve

Haha, nothing at all. I am sure you would do yours a lot better than I did.
You might consider using the Eduard set, which looks fit for the early model.

Regards,

Douglas

Since the "framing" end brackets (I don't know the proper term) are separate components, leave the Mk 12 ones off and don't bend the two arrays (actually there are two antennas with the Mk 4 or 12 ... top and bottom) quite as close together and you would have a pretty close Mk 4. Look at the images I posted for an idea of what I'm talking about.

In the smaller scales, this wasn't as big of a deal, particularly 1/700. Most PE makers left off the smaller array details, because it would have been impossible to see/make them. For me it just really is noticable in 1/144 scale. Douglas is the first person I have seen who built these parts up and I saw/noticed the array.

I never noticed that the BENSON-GLEAVES class didn't get the Mk 12 radar with the Mk 22 from the photos until I read it in textual records. I went back and study the arrays real close and could see the difference.

Sorry.