Calling all Iowa-class (BB-61) fans

[Anonymous]

Hello all!
I am back from my visit to the Mo and AZ memorials in Pearl Harbor. Still sorting through my pics. I used my digital so I took quite a few. They are all about 1 Meg in size so I will have to figure out how to post pics since I have not done that yet.
Tony-
Unfortunately I did not get an solid answer to your question regarding the anti-skid on the fantail. From the photos and drawings in the Stillwell book, I believe you are accurate that the anti-skid surface extended to the most aft 5" guns. It appears to me (someone please correct me if I am wrong) that the teak had been removed during the modernization and the anti-skid coating was applied to the steel decking. It appears they removed this coating and replaced it with the teak. The teak currently does extend farther aft than when it was active however I believe as shown in your photo. I do have photos of the decking around turret #3 going aft that I can post. I think the anti-skid is similar to what is used on carrier decks now for a surface coating. Maybe posting a few of the photos can clear it up - will try to do this soon.
Chris34-
I took several photos of the forward Mark 37 5" gun director and the "building" located between that and the fire control tower (detailed in Stillwell's book on page 409). I was not sure if you meant this or the Mark 38 16" gun director on top of the fire control tower. If you did mean the 16" gun director, I may only have photos of that from a distance since the forward fire control tower is not currently accessable to the public so I could not go up there (eventhough I would have really enjoyed the view from up there!)

I also had taken many photos of the John Haynes model of the 1945 USS Missouri. THAT was a beautiful model!!

Sorry the photos are not ready yet but I will have to read up on the rules of posting photos and sizes allowed.
Later-
Jeff Seeling

[Seeling]

Since I was researching while I wrote, it took a while to complete my last posting. Not sure if I logged out somehow or if I was cut off since it took me so long but I will work on getting some Mo photos posted.
Later
Jeff Seeling

[Rory Smith]

hi Guys,
Rory,
The scuppers are on your NJ hull already. I have never checked their placement though, as I have not yet built the Big J in 1/350th scale. As it is, my 1/350 Missouri has been stalled for so long! The scuppers have to be removed for a WWII version, (as on the Tamiya Missouri), but you need not worry.
If you want to do something(s) cool on your Big J, I'd recommend the L'Arsenal twin bits/chocks. They really look good! Alos, a set of w/t doors will add quite a bit too. Just add them on, and pain the doors only. if you look at my 1/700 NJ, you can see the model has already been painted.
The twin bits effort is something, but adding the w/t doors is easy. I can share the removal process I used for the twin bits....
Nice work so far!
Tony

Hello all,

Tony,
I looked at the diagram in the back of the Stilwell book and sure enough, the w/t door and porthole locations are there. The only problem I have found so far, is that the port and starboard walls on 01 deck below turret 2 (the angled ones) are a few feet in scale longer on the kit than the drawings. Did you run into this problem there or anywhere else? Also, post away on how you removed the kit bits. Thanks for the help.

Rory

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Saw this pic and I had to post it!

From this view, the ships look very close together. Taken from DVIC
Quote:
Compressed shot of the US Navy (USN) [front to back] Belknap Class Cruiser USS WILLIAM H. STANDLEY (DLG 32/CG 32), USN Iowa Class Battleship USS NEW JERSEY (BB 62), USN Forrestal Class Aircraft Carrier USS RANGER (CV 61), a USN Belknap Class Cruiser, and a USN Oliver Hazard Perry Class Guided Missile Frigate.
Very busy picture!

Rory,
I'll see about sharing a pic of the foredeck with certain raised details removed.
Stand by..........
Here is the foredeck comparison:





Tamiya OOB and Tamiya with the breakwater removed and replaced with the L'Arsenal piece; same for the 20" twin bits. Some might say, "Now that makes a difference..!". If this includes you, I'd agree! Thanks to L'Arsenal!
Tony

[ModelMonkey]

Tony,

[dick wood]

Great looking so far

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
These pics are for Rory's benefit; they were taken over two years ago! Talk about a stalled project! I just can't leave the Iowa Fans alone!
One of these days, I'll get back to the Mighy Mo!
Till then, I'll keep watching the threads and getting what I can get......done!
My friends...Iowa Fans!
Tony

[ArizonaBB39]

Well my Iowa class brethren. Having come to a stalling point on my North Carolina build, I decided to pull out one of my 1/350 Tamiya Missouri kits. I have two, one will be super detailed and built as the Iowa in her 1943-1944 fit with Ms32 camouflage. That project is a ways off, as I plan to really super detail it. (after market guns, PE, etc etc)

That being said, I have started working on my "extra" kit. I have three of the Iowa conversion kits, so I'm using bits from this (the open bridge and some other platforms), the navy's proposed Ms32 camouflage scheme that was never used on an Iowa class ship, and my imagination. I've christened this the USS Illinois BB-65, one of the Iowas that was never finished.

I only started working today and I have all of the painting on the hull finished, camouflage, boot striping, and red hull, all done. I'll take some pics later.

I'm using the GMM Iowa class battleship PE fret, just the original one. No super detailing on this build, just a nice "easy" one

Camouflage Measure 32, Design 7A BB-61 (Iowa) class. Starboard and deck
Camouflage Measure 32, Design 7A BB-61 (Iowa) class. Port
Navsource BB-65 ILLINOIS Page

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Abram,
Love to see pics.
I do recall the Hobbycraft 1/350 Wisconsin model actually coming with all 6 Iowa class markings, and that the decal sheet was the best part of the kit.
Don't suppose you'd want to plunk down $40 something for the Wisconsin kit just to get the decals; what with all of the available , "do it yourself", decal stuff out there. You might call Hobbycraft Canada for a decal sheet by itself. The Hobbycraft Canada phone number is on any of their kits. Those guys from Hobbycraft Canada are pretty cool.
Good luck, Tony

[ArizonaBB39]

Tony, thanks man!

Ok, here are some pictures I took really quick. I'm sorry for the quality, I just snapped them off in my bedroom. I'll take better ones outside in the sun this week. For now, enjoy!

Overhead
Port
Starboard
16"/50 gun, almost finished, sporting new gun emplacements1
16"/50 gun, almost finished, sporting new gun emplacements2
16"/50 gun, almost finished, sporting new gun emplacements3
16"/50 gun, almost finished, sporting new gun emplacements4

The turret is turret number 2, except for the camouflage turret number 3 will be identical. Besides the 40mm and 20mm guns I still need to add a detail or two (ladders on the back of the turret and floater net baskets). I'm having a good time building the kit, I forgot how much fun putting the Tamiya 1/350 Missouri together was. I think I'll grab a few more and do all the Iowa class ships!!

[ArizonaBB39]

Another update, all three 16"/50 turrets are finished:

All three Front
All three Top
Turret 1 Back
Turret 1 Top
Turret 2
Turret 2 and 3
Turret 3 Back
Turret 3 Top

[Seeling]

Hi Guys-
Here are some of the pics that I had taken on board the Missouri in March. Half of the pics posted are of the ship and half are of the model located on the ship in WWII MS 22 condition.

















The model was VERY well detailed. Like to USS AZ pics I posted earlier, the model was in a clear plastic case so some of the pics were not real clear or had reflections on them. One item that did catch my eye is the location of the ladders to the controller tubs on the 40mm guns near the bow section. From previous pics from books on the Missouri, the ladders appeared to be located on the inner side of the tub instead of the outer "railing" side. This seems to be one of the many subtle differences between the Iowa class battleships later in the war. Has anyone else noticed this?
I had also taken many photos from all around the actual ship but only posted 8 so far. Tony had asked before I went to check with the tour guides about the changes to the wood vs non-skid material near the stern and aft 16" guns. I did not get a response but will continue to see if I can get an answer. I did notice many circular steel circular projections near the area of the guns which are nowhere else on the ship. I wonder if these had something to do with the non-skid surface that was previously in that area. Anyone know?

Will dig through more of the photos to see if any have good details that may be interesting to others.
Take care-
J Seeling

>Edited by ArizonaBB39, I fixed the pictures<

[ModelMonkey]

From:
Tom Helvig, CTRCM, USN (Retired - 1975)
Volunteer Writer/Editor The Jerseyman
Battleship New Jersey Museum and Memorial
68 Boothby Drive
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054
(856) 778-4913

The Jerseyman is published online as a keepsake journal for Battleship New Jersey volunteers, crewmen of the former USS New Jersey, and our readers. The current issue of The Jerseyman for the 3Q-2007, is now available for download at the websites shown below. If these links do not work, please copy and paste into your browser.

Battleship New Jersey Volunteer Website:

http://ussnewjersey.com/newszz.htm

USS New Jersey Veteran's Website:

http://www.ussnewjersey.org/jerseyman.htm


HIGHLIGHTS of The Jerseyman 3Q-2007
1. Dry Docking USS New Jersey - Sepember 1967 by Lieutenant C. Hamilton, USN (Retired)
2. Engineering aboard USS New Jersey by Lieutenant C. Hamilton, USN (Retired)
3. The Oral History of Howard Schnauber, USMC
4. The Oral History of Robert Blanchard, USS Franklin (CV-13)
5. The day we attacked USS New Jersey by Arnold Kleeberg, Captain, New Jersey State Police, Retired
6. "Trooper Arnold Kleeberg was one of my NJ State Police Instructors" by ship's volunteer Carl A. Williams, Colonel, NJSP Retired
7. National Museum of the Pacific War. With thanks to ship's volunteer Rolland Garber
8. "About The Decks" - The first in a series of individual photographs and short biographies of the volunteers serving aboard Battleship New Jersey
9. Ship's Bells - USS Illinois (BB-65), USS Indiana (BB-58 ), USS Savannah (CL-42)
10."Battleship Days" by Hamp Law

[Anonymous]

Hi all,

I am a new ship modeler and new to this forum. i am currently building a 1/350 New Jersey (Tamiya) in 1980's version. I have seen some people posted their pictures on line. It is very impressive...

I tried Tamiya's colors in the instruction. It looks very dark...
I want to know what color people use to pain the ship (the hull & the wood deck)?

Thanks

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Guest,
On the 1/700 Modern New Jersey I finished about a year ago.....
Deck Tan: Floquil "Mud" lightened with Floquil "Reefer White"
"washed" and "streaked" to bring out planking
Deck Grey: WEM Modern Deck Grey 20 Lightened with Floquil "Reefer White"
Non Skid Areas: Testors Acryl Engine Grey with some "earthy" colors mixed in.
Haze Grey: Here's where I went wrong, (but it looked okay): Testors Acryl Haze Grey 5-H, (WWII color) Lightened with Testors Acryl White
Next Time I build a modern USN Warship 80's and newer I will use Neutral Grey FS36270 mixed 2:1 with white

I see you got another answer already, but just in case you wanted "options".
Tony

[Avery Boyer]

Which modernized New Jersey kit is better? I would go for the Tamiya because to me it just "Looks the part" in a way that the Trumpy kit just doesn't. But, for the price of the Tamiya kit, I could buy the Trumpy kit and a dedicated PE set. Are there any MAJOR advantages to getting the Tamiya kit over the Trumpy? I know that such items as the Seahawks, CIWS are better, but again the price is an issue. Thanks in Advance.

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Avery,
if you find the ability, search around for kit reviews and close-ups.
The Trumpeter/Pit-Road kit is okay, but the Tamiya kit is much more accurate.
Period!
Look in the gallery also........at different builds. If you read this entire thread from page one, I'd say all of your answers are there already. If you want to do a full hull build and want the best of all worlds, use the Trumpeter hull bottom and the Tamiya.........kit.
Tony

[Timmy C]

Which modernized New Jersey kit is better? I would go for the Tamiya because to me it just "Looks the part" in a way that the Trumpy kit just doesn't. But, for the price of the Tamiya kit, I could buy the Trumpy kit and a dedicated PE set. Are there any MAJOR advantages to getting the Tamiya kit over the Trumpy? I know that such items as the Seahawks, CIWS are better, but again the price is an issue. Thanks in Advance.

I have the Trumpy Missouri kit; the CIWS, while it's nice that they tried to attempt the replicate the 6 barrels, just looks over scaled, and I had to cut off all the outer 'spokes' and leave the center one poking out. There's also a rather annoying punchhole in the back of the CIWS dome, though it can be covered with thick paint or some such. The windows are also annoying, as the frames are much too thick. I sanded them flat and built up a small layer of Future, then painted the area black, and used a knife to cut little lines in the black paint to represent the frames. Looks much better, in my opinion, though tricky to get the spacings correct.

[Timmy C]

Ok, finally got some pictures up of my build in Picture Post:

http://www.shipmodels.info/mwphpBB2/vie ... hp?t=26947

Don't have any of those ECM countermeasure thingies at the top of the tower, and don't have the skills to make the platforms for them either, so that's being left out.

[Tracy White]

Figured it was past time for me to post this here: