Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[ArizonaBB39]

Good grief, Steve, that is unbelievable!! After seeing that, I think I'm going to go home and use my Hornet for a doorstop.

Those were my thoughts exactly

[Capt652]

Steve,

What thickness sheet did you use for the floor/ceiling center section and also the transverse beams?

Capt652

[ModelMonkey]

0.020". Once the small girders are installed on the Air Group insert, it is stiff enough to resist any sag.

[Tracy White]

Just so everyone knows, Essex and Yorktown had different catwalk structures underneath the overhang due to the 20mm galleries that they originally had. The Hornet photo should not be used as a guide for those two ships.

[lisec]

silly Q,I think,but...were ALL horizontal surfaces painted in Deck blue or gray, including the island surfaces? the dragon reference guide calls for them to be painted with the vertical paint,in my case Ocean gray...this stinks a bit...

[Tracy White]

Yup, the documentation says "horizontal surfaces" with no "accept for" at all. Be a lot easier otherwise, wouldn't it?

[lisec]

I figured that this is the case, I have painted and assembled major island parts with the deck gray and just looked at the painting guide and went: hmm...
the top of the funnel has also deck gray with the actual top in black?

[Tracy White]

Ummm.. the top was black; I don't know of any horizontal part of the funnel other than the grated walkway around parts.

[Seabee Mike]

Look on Navsource's CV-16 page and you'll see some photos of CV-16 bing widened that I sent in. I think it's wrong to call it blistering personally.

I believe the extensions were not even each side either ?, four feet on the port side where most of the weight was added and three feet on the starboard side is what l've read somewhere, still with in the width required to transit the Panama canal which as a safe bet is 100 feet, though some modern container ships push this to 105 feet, I think the actual locks are 110 feet wide ?.

Best

Michael

The blisters were actually 5' wide on each side and extended from frame 39 aft to frame 184. If you look at AOTS - page 64/65 (Hanger Deck Plan) - it would be from the point where the Cabins (Item 1) end just about in line with the aft end of Elevator 1 and extend to the forward end of the Aviation Repair Shop (Item 23) on the port side (this is a straight line P/S as well).

Hope this helps. The info is from some old plans for the Intrepid CV-11.

Seabee Mike

[Tracy White]

Eduard has released some photos of a new set for their Tico and Hancock models:

http://www.eduard.cz/info/photos/53030/

This set is sized for the short flight deck and extra notch that these two ships had; Ticonderoga early in her career and Hancock until May-June '45. Catwalks have the same problems that the GMM and WEM sets do, with the lack of cut-outs for the little steps down, but it does appear to provide some of the side bulkheads with openings, albeit they appear to be the wrong shape.

[Michael Davies]

Eduard has released some photos of a new set for their Tico and Hancock models:

http://www.eduard.cz/info/photos/53030/

This set is sized for the short flight deck and extra notch that these two ships had; Ticonderoga early in her career and Hancock until May-June '45. Catwalks have the same problems that the GMM and WEM sets do, with the lack of cut-outs for the little steps down, but it does appear to provide some of the side bulkheads with openings, albeit they appear to be the wrong shape.

Interesting, its shown me a few areas I had wrong on the Shangri La, the fencing around the radio masts for one and the hull wall behind the Port hanger deck quad structure, I'd assumed this area was the same on all vessels, it looks like the vessels built with that tub from new have a different set of roller shutter door arrangements to those that were retro fitted with the Quad tub.

l'm not convinced about the 5" turrets though, what is that fencing they have around the barrel cut outs ?, I've never seen the likes of that on Essex carriers, maybe on other ships with the same mount but not on an Essex, not yet anyway.

Best

Michael

[Michael Davies]

I believe the extensions were not even each side either ?, four feet on the port side where most of the weight was added and three feet on the starboard side is what l've read somewhere, still with in the width required to transit the Panama canal which as a safe bet is 100 feet, though some modern container ships push this to 105 feet, I think the actual locks are 110 feet wide ?.

Best

Michael

The blisters were actually 5' wide on each side and extended from frame 39 aft to frame 184. If you look at AOTS - page 64/65 (Hanger Deck Plan) - it would be from the point where the Cabins (Item 1) end just about in line with the aft end of Elevator 1 and extend to the forward end of the Aviation Repair Shop (Item 23) on the port side (this is a straight line P/S as well).

Hope this helps. The info is from some old plans for the Intrepid CV-11.

Seabee Mike

That makes sense, ie even each side, the frame station information will allow me to get them in the right place thank you.

Kindest

Michael

[Tracy White]

Interesting, its shown me a few areas I had wrong on the Shangri La, the fencing around the radio masts for one and the hull wall behind the Port hanger deck quad structure, I'd assumed this area was the same on all vessels, it looks like the vessels built with that tub from new have a different set of roller shutter door arrangements to those that were retro fitted with the Quad tub.

The roller doors in question did change; with the removal of the hangar deck catapult there wasn't the need for the same arrangement on the port side. All Long hulls had this arrangement and the later short hulls were launched with it. None of the earlier ships that had it were modified during the war though.

l'm not convinced about the 5" turrets though, what is that fencing they have around the barrel cut outs ?, I've never seen the likes of that on Essex carriers, maybe on other ships with the same mount but not on an Essex, not yet anyway.

It was for the blast bags you see on the guns sometimes. You can see Lexington without the blast bags here and you can just barely make out those risers (what their exact name was, I'm not sure).

[Michael Davies]

Interesting, its shown me a few areas I had wrong on the Shangri La, the fencing around the radio masts for one and the hull wall behind the Port hanger deck quad structure, I'd assumed this area was the same on all vessels, it looks like the vessels built with that tub from new have a different set of roller shutter door arrangements to those that were retro fitted with the Quad tub.

The roller doors in question did change; with the removal of the hangar deck catapult there wasn't the need for the same arrangement on the port side. All Long hulls had this arrangement and the later short hulls were launched with it. None of the earlier ships that had it were modified during the war though.

l'm not convinced about the 5" turrets though, what is that fencing they have around the barrel cut outs ?, I've never seen the likes of that on Essex carriers, maybe on other ships with the same mount but not on an Essex, not yet anyway.

It was for the blast bags you see on the guns sometimes. You can see Lexington without the blast bags here and you can just barely make out those risers (what their exact name was, I'm not sure).

Well you learn something new every day.



Your tip off sent me scurrying for a trawl through my newely aquired books WP22 USS Ticonderoga and Sqn Sig On Deck CV-16, above image is from Ticonderoga in 1944.

I believe the common term for those bags are bloomers. I wonder if all 5" turrets had the riser supports, l've not seen one with bloomers fitted yet.

Thanks for the clarification on the Port hanger cat doors, the five door arched ones do seem to be confined to short hulls that did not have the Quad tub fitted as new, I think only Bennington and BHR had the long hull door arrangement from new as there the only two short hulls built as new with the port hanger Quad tub, Bennington certainly did but I cant as yet find a decent view of BHR to confirm.

Best

Michael

[Michael Davies]

I worked the island a little more since I acquired the Raven Essex Class-Carriers book from a used book store through Amazon. I added the midway platform at the yard-arm level up to the tripod platform and the reproducer on the starboard side of the funnel. I also added the Paper Labs Mk 51 directors, which I personally think are more to scale than the L'Arsenal version along with splinter shielding on the tubs. I came up with my own version of caged ladders in various places. I used the Paper Labs 24" and 36" spotlights and took liberty in using a 24" spotlight to represent a signal light that was probably suppose to be 12" diameter.



You folks like snow? In the last two hours we got 12" of system snow, more lake effect to follow. Snow-blowing in the morning!!

Capt652

Really nice, nice to see another Shangri La in build, there's not many of them out there and information is scarce, I sometimes wonder if I picked the right subject matter, and perhaps one of the more common ones would have made my life easier .

Heres a little update on mine


Seeing yours raise even more questions, did Shangri La actually have the extra searchlight platforms at the base of the funnel ?, I've seen pictures in late 44 with out, pictures in 47 with out, yet none inbetween that conclusively show them there ?, the same goes for that tall mast aft of the funnel with the large pot on, I can only find one photo of that and it wasnt fitted in 47 or 44 so it came and went rather quickly.

Best

Michael

[Obiwan3]

How many Shangri-La builders are out there? I recently found out that my late father-in-law served on her. So I'm currently gathering info, along with a Hancock (1/350) & GMM PE. I'm planning on a May- June '45 time period build.
From reading the various sources, for the Measure 21 scheme, it seems to be the late version using #7 Navy Grey (from the Warships Perspective booklet). Is that correct?
javascript:emoticon(':anyone:')

Thanks

[Capt652]

Michael Davies wrote:

Seeing yours raise even more questions, did Shangri La actually have the extra searchlight platforms at the base of the funnel ?, I've seen pictures in late 44 with out, pictures in 47 with out, yet none inbetween that conclusively show them there ?, the same goes for that tall mast aft of the funnel with the large pot on, I can only find one photo of that and it wasnt fitted in 47 or 44 so it came and went rather quickly.

Great to see someone else showing interest in the greatest of the carriers, Shangri-la too. I did post a few pictures early in this post that my Dad took in the Sept-Oct '45 era of the ship. From the pictures I see the spotlight blisters on both sides of the funnel base. I also have a 8'' x 10" picture that my father, a plankholder, has hanging on his wall that is titled 'Navy Day 1945' that shows both the spotlight platform (port side) and the mast antenna mounted port-side rear along side the funnel. My Dad's picture is slightly different from the one posted at NavSource, showing more of the side of the ship. I do not know what kind of antenna is on top of that mast, I think Franklin and Lexington had similar masts but different antennas. My pictures shows that mast from three perspectives, photographer standing on front port corner of FD, from airplane off port quarter, and from shore looking directly port at mid-ships. I don't see that antenna mentioned in any of the reference books I own. (On the other ships the antenna looks like a SG type above a crow's nest sort of circular structure). I don't see anything but a 'post', unless each picture happened to show a SG only from the side (plus add in a good dose of blurriness) And my scale may be off on that bit of scratch-build.

I am building my ship in the Oct '45 era. The pictures taken in '47 at Puget Sound Naval Yard show the spotlight platforms and mast antenna gone.

Michael, if you have any pictures of the Shang, or if you would like any snapshots that I have, please PM...
Capt652

[Capt652]

Hi again,

As far as paint color is concerned I would submit that the Shangri-la which was repainted in Feb '45 in Hawaii received the 5N Navy Blue color. The Navy did switch over to gray in January but I believe Tracy commented earlier that the new paint made its way out from the states progressively, east coast and west coast first and then Hawaii and war zones after. I have color pictures (video capture) from September '45 that definitely show a blue tint rather than gray. I based that on comparison of other known colors in the same picture, ie US flag.

Capt652

[Tracy White]

The order to switch to the Navy Gray paint happened on Feb 26, but it also references a November document that I don't have. What that leaves unclear is whether a warning order went out that new paints would be forthcoming and to expect their arrivals, or if it was just a memo regarding something else leading to a new paint directive. There's lots of documentation in December and January saying "new directives are coming" and "use Navy Blue" so I'm fairly confident they wouldn't have painted Navy Gray before early March.

[Obiwan3]

Thanks for the update as to the paint measure. Well do I know the time delays for effecting a change after the original order gets posted. This happens all the time in aircraft, so why not have such a lag when it comes to repainting a ship? I like the 5N Navy Blue scheme.