Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[Timmy C]

I had had some problems with the rear deck's alignment lines not fitting, so I just removed the rear deck's lines. There is a section of the area behind the port rear sponson that has some major gaps in my model, which, not have putty at the time, I had not fixed.

[Tracy White]

First off, let me say that if you don't have "The Fighting Lady" by Clark Reynolds I highly recommend it for builders of CV-10 Yorktown. It's provided me with lots of little details.

1) For 1945, "R@L Tracy" clued me in to the need to lower two quad 40mm mounts on the port side level with the 5-inch singles and fill in the corresponding flight deck cutouts for those mounts. Thanks Tracy! Before I start cutting, please confirm or deny I am about to lower the correct mounts.

I'm 95% sure at this time; once the wife wakes up and I can look on the home computer where my photos are stored I can finalize that. -added later: yup, they were both lowered

2) Any thoughts on how the aircraft were painted in late 1944 vice early 1945 and how the air group was organized? I suspect by early 1945 the air group might have been generally glossy sea blue with the white diagonal on the tail and triangle on the upper right wing. I like the look of the three-tone blue scheme on Navy aircraft better so am hoping there might be a time period when the airgroup was three-tone yet the ship had tha late radar fit.

New construction would have been in glossy sea blue but a lot of units traded in their aircraft when they were done and were sent back, so you have a mixture of both. There were three separate air groups on Yorktown in the time period between October 1944 and the end of the war. The first two were aboard for at least part of the time she had dazzle, so you can choose a little bit based on aircraft and paint preferances.

First was Air Group Three (CVG-3), composed of VB-3 (SB2C), VF-3 (F6F), and VT-3 (TBM). Air Group Three was attached to Yorktown from very late October, 1944 to very early March, 1945. The F6Fs were in Glossy Sea Blue, but the SB2Cs were tri-color, according to a photo on page 214 of "The Fighting Lady" book (dated Jan 12, 1945) and another on page 52 of "Flight Deck: US Navy Carrier Operations 1940-1945" by Al Adcock (dated February 7th 1945). I can't find any good applicable photos of VT-3 to tell what schemes their TBF-1s were in but there is some more information on the squadron history here under VA-35 for those that are interested. Photos of Air Group 88 on Yorktown in August 1945 (page 62, "TBF/TBM Avenger Units of World War 2" by Barrett Tillman) show a mixture of schemes.. about 2/3 tri-color and 1/3 all-over glossy. The composition numbers for CVG-3 are different than earlier structures to reflect the new Kamikaze threat. I don't have primary source materials but John Sheridan's CV-10 Data on SteelNavy comes pretty close to what's in the "The Fighting Lady" book on page 189; 45 F6F Hellcats, 4 F6F-5N night-fighting Hellcats, 24 SB2C Helldivers, and 17 TBF-1 Avengers.

This, however, changed during the cruise as VF-3 was split into two squadrons. I can't find the exact sequence and date of events, but on page 226 of "The Fighting Lady" book it states that "the 72-plane VF-3 was split in two, one half becoming VBF-3..." VB-3 and VT-3 were still present and while I have no information on their numbers, I would imagine they stayed the same.

March 5 1945 CVG-9 took over for CVG-3, inheritting their aircraft (listed as F6F-5s, SB2C-4,s and TBM-3s on page 243 of "The Fighting Lady" book. The ship recevied new paint at that time, but still carried the Dazzle so it would have been freshened. CVG-9 would have had these aircraft during the sinking of Yamato April 7th, 1945.

She was painted out of Dazzle late May, 1945. On June 17th, Air Group 9 was replaced by CVG-88, which inheritted MOST of CVG-9s planes but brought 37 FG-1D Corsairs (equivilant to the F4U-1D) to the ship (Page 303 of "The Fighting Lady" book.). Her aircraft received the new tailcode of RR at this time.

3) Did Yorktown have any radar-equipped Hellcats or Corsairs at any time she was still in camouflage?

She had Hellcat night fighters (see above). I'm not sure which version but I'm reasonably confident that it was the -5N and not the -5E as she actually had the radar from a -5N mounted on the starboard fwd catwalk for use spotting diving kamikazes. To me it makes sense that they'd use a radar they had spare parts readily available for.

4) There was some discussion in an earlier post about where Keith Hufnagel positioned the three starboard side Quad 40mm Bofors tubs (the ones under the island) on his magnificent build. He placed them a little bit lower on the hull than where Trumpy would have the builder put them. Can anyone further explain just how low these mounts and their tubs need to go? Sounds like "Bofors tub Limbo".

Keith's correct, Trumpeter has the builder mount them with the bottom flush with the main (I.E. Hangar) deck, which is too high. Measuring out my 1/192 CV-13 plans they look like the bottom should be about 30 real inches below the main deck.... roughly 2mm in 1/350th by my calculations. Or .16" --> .085" in 1/350th if anyone cares to double check.

5) Tracy reported that some of the Mk-51 Directors need to be moved from the hangar deck level higher to the catwalks. Any specifics?

Generally the Mk 51s for quad 40mm mounts on the main deck (except the stern mounts) were on the catwalks above the mounts. This is true for the mounts on the port sponson where the hangar cat had been and the two starboard aft.

Another point to make is that the two quad 40mm mounts on the port side aft of the deck edge elevator (parts F7 & F12) are incorrect in that they have the mounts level with the catwalk; they should be a couple of feet lower and the catwalk broken at the tub. This photo in Keith's CV-10 build should show you what I mean if I wasn't clear enough.

6) Any comments on chock placement? Thanks to Loren Perry who reports they are too high and should be trimmed down (rather trimmed up - it's the bottoms that are too tall). The kit's positioning of some don't look right either.

Best advice here is to pick up either some Corsair Armada or L'arsenal chocks... they're light-years ahead of those in the kits. I also mentioned some missing chocks and roller curtain details earlier in the thread you might want to make note of.

7) Tracy reports that the hangar deck is to be painted deck gray. Is the deck of the forward port-side hangar deck catapult sponson (two Quad Bofors are positioned there) also gray or deck blue 20-B? The sponson's deck extends outward directly from the hangar deck and I wonder if the crew painted that deck differently than the hangar deck or just continued the deck gray onto the sponson deck.

As Devin mentioned, the forecastle deck would be deck blue. The port sponson deck you mentioned would be deck blue as well since it was an exterior deck.

Last question - color of splinter shield interior. Can anyone confirm the color? Pics of some ships such as USS Missouri show that the deck blue 20-B was carried up onto the splinter shield interior. True for Yorktown?

A lot of it depends on location; in the 40mm tubs the sides were covered with ammunition clips.... which were then covered with canvas flash (fire) guards. As far as the rest of the ship I'm not sure, but I did find a photo taken in pri-fly that show the bulkheads there to be lighter than the deck (page 170 in "The Fighting Lady" book).

A couple of spurious items I came across in my notes I should mention...
* If you're detailing the hangar bay, Yorktown got Light labyrinths during the late 1944 overhaul.

[ArizonaBB39]

Some stuff Redacted by Tracy


Lets not forget the starboard side sponsoon at the forward roller doors on the hangar deck, where the catapult used to be!




In that third pic you might be able to see where the hangar bulkheads didn't line up on the starboard side, as you can see I didn't catch it in time (its right about in the middle of the pic)


And here is a pic of how I painted the hangar deck level and outside decks

[Tracy White]

OK, here's a bit regarding those port aft tubs I mentioned earlier... Navsource has a photo I donated that is on their DD-745 Brush page. You can see how the catwalk ends and the the 40mm tub extends inward to the edge of the flight deck.

[abramsteve]

Thanks very much for your very detailed response to my question Gordon. Ive printed them out and will hopefully give them a go over the Christmas period!

Thanks again!

[youngb]

Just ordered Dragon's 1/700 USS Hancock.

A couple of questions;

1. Was she MS22 by mid 1945. I read somewhere recently she could have been Ms12(1945 version)? When exactly did she wear MS22 (or MS12)? Was looking at doing these two schemes but now a bit confused. Exact timeframes as to when she wore which camo scheme would be nice. Looking at making the model around mid 1945 during the Okinawa and Japan strikes.

2. Did she have the shortened deck (aka Randolph) or the lengthened deck which came with the kit?

3. I presume her aircraft had the letters for recognition rather than the symbols. Can anyone confirm?

Hope someone can help.

regards
Bruce

[Tracy White]

1. Was she MS22 by mid 1945. I read somewhere recently she could have been Ms12(1945 version)? When exactly did she wear MS22 (or MS12)? Was looking at doing these two schemes but now a bit confused. Exact timeframes as to when she wore which camo scheme would be nice. Looking at making the model around mid 1945 during the Okinawa and Japan strikes.

2. Did she have the shortened deck (aka Randolph) or the lengthened deck which came with the kit?

3. I presume her aircraft had the letters for recognition rather than the symbols. Can anyone confirm?

Hancock is something I have a lot of late war gaps on, but here's what I can answer:

1) She was scheduled to be painted in Measure 12 in this document dated February 1945. I have some photos of her in 1946 and she's not MS 12, but she's being mothballed and could have been repainted a couple of times, so I can't confidently state WHAT she was late war.

2) Short deck. The 1946 photos confirm this. She did, however, have the large notch port side for the extra Mk 37 director that was never shipped filled in in the 1945 refit at Pearl.

3) I believe so but have no photographs or documents either way.

[Hanchang Kuo]

Thank you Tracy and others for the helps. Below is my 1/700 Trumpeter Franklin looks like so far,



Originally projected as a three-month build. With my baby son getting older I wonder if I will ever be able to finish this thing...

[ModelMonkey]

Abe, good catch on the starboard side sponson! I would have likely missed that.

Hanchang Kuo, that model is simply magnificent. I really like the 20mm gallery level bulkhead detail! And wind deflectors on the island in 1/700, very impressive! The aircraft look terrific too. Please post more photos.

[Tracy White]

Someone over on SteelNavy brought this CV-13 Franklin build to light. Most impressive.

[Anonymous]

Work continues on Trumpy's 1/350 USS Yorktown CV-10 modified to
represent the ship as she appeared after her October 1944 refit.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=32648&start=0&st=0 ... =a#p191885

[Bryan Holtby]

Im looking for a bit of advice

I havent built a CV in years...as in 20+ and Ive only built 3 ships in the last 10 years.....

So, I want to do up a 1/700 essex cv and was wondering which manufacturer would give me the least amount of grief in the build. My local hobby store only carries Trump and Dragon CV's at the moment so Im pretty much stuck with a choice of these two.

I doubt I will add much extra detail but I do plan on fleshing out the aircraft compliment both in the hangar and on deck.

I would also like to add that the information you guys provide is invaluable.

[Timmy C]

Check the first post in this thread, Bryan

[Tracy White]

Dragon's 700th CV-16 Lexington is probably the easiest all around. Simple paint scheme (non-dazzle) and few changes unless you're backdating.

[Guest]

Check the first post in this thread, Bryan

LOL, I read almost the ENTIRE thread over the last couple of days.....and I looked at every model on that list BUT I missed the part about the Lex......doh.

I have done my 1/700 Tirpitz with her 'dazzle' cammo job and it came out quite nice so Im not shy of a crazy paint scheme.....but its tough with a brush!

[Tracy White]

You might want to consider their CV-9 Essex kit then, in Dazzle. It's a nice kit and only a few corrections to make.

The Trumpeter kits aren't bad; just more fiddley.

[Jose Chaica]

Hello to you all...
While looking through Raven�s book "Essex class carriers" and Ship�s Data nr.7 "USS Yorktown", I came across 2 sets of hull lines. Now, while hull line at the stern do seem to match quite well, at the bow, they seem to be quite different.
I tried to overlap them, and there is a significant difference between them.. Raven�s lines are supposed to be for a long-hull ship, while the other book (drawn by A.B. Chesley) are, obviously, for a short hull one.
Until now, I thought that both long and short hull, had the exact same hull lines, with the only difference being at the extreme bow. Did they shared the same lines ??? Or is there something wrong with one of these drawings ??? I also checked with the Warship Perspectives book, but they seem an exact copy of Raven�s lines...
Can you all help me out with this doubt ???

Thanks in advance...

.

[Tracy White]

Looking good Steve; you opened the same door I did!

[MartinJQuinn]

That looks fantastic Steve....really great work.

[ArizonaBB39]

Looking good Steve; you opened the same door I did!

I opened the door on the opposite side of the island to that one. Strange, we all open a door on the same deck...

Looking good Steve, keep us updated for sure!