CWatson wrote:
So I would like to confirm the colors used on Washington's MS. 12 Mod paint scheme carried in 42'.
Most of the hull above waterline: Sea Blue (5-S)
(for some reason I always thought it was some sort of dark grey here)
Camo pattern along upper part of hull:Ocean Grey (5-O)
Superstructure and turrets from main deck up Haze Grey (5-H)
The superstructure has splotches I assume are Ocean Grey (5-O)? With a splotch amidship that appears darker, Sea Blue (5-S)?
The turrets have blotches on them, are they Ocean Grey too? They appear darker than the splotches on superstructure, are they Sea Blue (5-S)?
The deck: Deck Blue (20-B)
The above post mentions they were light, possibly Ocean Grey?
I will do a seperate post for North Carolina.
5-N and 5-O on the hull, 5-O and 5-H above the deck but both she and North Carolina carried the 5-N up a little into the #1 and #3 turrets, also check along the 01 level and the lower part of the barbette for turret #2.
As for decks, the original 20B was closer to 5-O than the revised formula but there is a monkey wrench in the works as well. The original deck paint base did not stick to fresh teak well. Skippers were allowed to try several things to camouflage their decks. Mix 5-O into the 20B, use straight 5-O or if all else failed sail with bright decks until the teal weathered enough to allow paint to stick. Staining or using dirty oil was prohibited. Best guess for BB's 55 and 56 is a mix of 5-O and 20B.
ARH wrote:
The earliest the platform appears is Nov 1943
Somebody better tell Norfolk NY they wrote the wrong date on a few negatives on 06/03/1942 then. She has the beginning platform with pipe rails at that time along the aft 2/3 of the tower sides and aft face of the tower.
Let me correct that.
The earliest the FULL platform appears is Nov 1943
The earliest the FULL platform appears is Nov 1943
Try again...........September 1943 for the full wrap around platform with splinter shield is when she left yards after the refit when it was completed to that configuration.
For extra credit, what was her original propeller suite configuration, when did she first get 5 bladed props, what were the 5 bladed prop serial numbers, when was her main battery director installed, when was her CXAM first mounted and why was she nicknamed The Showboat?
Hmm... the serial numbers on the props might be a bit hard to model... even in 1:350 scale...
A (hopefully) easier question: When did Washinton get her main battery directors, 1.1 quads, floatplanes, and initial set of radar? Before or after getting repainted into Ms. 12? I'd like to model her in Ms. 1, but those empty tubs and missing directors of her as-commissioned fit would lead to people constantly asking "So, are you going to finish it?" over and over...
Avery Boyer wrote:She was nicknamed "The Showboat" because she was constantly making day trips out to sea while attempts were being made to fix her vibration problems.
BUUUUUUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Wrong answer, minus 5 points!
Avery Boyer wrote:She was nicknamed "The Showboat" because she was constantly making day trips out to sea while attempts were being made to fix her vibration problems.
BUUUUUUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Wrong answer, minus 5 points!
Huh???? Both my trusted resources were wrong???
from USS North Carolina Technical Reference 1 by Randall S. Shoker:
"In June of 1941, North Carolina made so many day trips out to sea to test equipment changes that the press nicknamed her 'The Showboat.'"
The other "trusted resource" was this very forum. I'll see if I can dig up the original post.
"It is best to remain silent and let others assume you are dumb than to speak up and remove all doubt"
The very clear pictures in the Classic Warships Pictorial of the North Carolina Class cleared up most of my questions on Washington's lite AA gun fit and positons during her early war service in the Atlantic,Except the stern area.
I know the tubs for the quads were not mounted yet on the stern yet, but what was there? The 1/700 Trumpeter kit I am working on has four single 20mm guns on the stern, two on each side of the aircraft crane. Is there any photos showing these details?
Gordon I used your plastic rod technique to fill a dozen uneeded holes and it worked like a charm.
CWatson wrote: I know the tubs for the quads were not mounted yet on the stern yet, but what was there? The 1/700 Trumpeter kit I am working on has four single 20mm guns on the stern, two on each side of the aircraft crane. Is there any photos showing these details?
From the Battleship Washington website:
Looks like a bunch of .50 caliber machine guns, with a 20mm in the foreground.
Martin
"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne
MartinJQuinn wrote: Looks like a bunch of .50 caliber machine guns, with a 20mm in the foreground.
Thanks ,I have seen that pic, it is the one that confirmed the .50 cals near "Y" turret to me. It however does not show the area I need clearly enough but may offer a clue.
The area I need info on is a little more aft, between the Kingfisher and the aircraft crane.
If you look just to the right of the rangefinder on "Y" turret you will see a verticle line that appears to be overlapped by the brace going from the pantoon to the wing on the plane. To me it looks alot like the tarp covered 20mm guns in the forground, except I do not see a gun shield. What do you guys think?
Because I'm doing the Washington in Nov '42, I thought it was easier to just replace the decks. In doing so, I am using the Floating Drydock plans for some of the details. In placing the upper 5" battery, I discovered that Trumpeter got the placement of the forward mount about 4 1/2 scale feet (5/32") aft of where it should be. For the folks that are doing the North Carolina, the 40mm mount is a bit forward.
That's a good little oops to know! I've got Washington '45 started and want to do a '42 version as well; that one's going to take a lot more work even before the changes that need to be made.
Here's another correction that you might want to consider. I noticed that the second level of the rear island looked somewhat squashed. Measuring against the drawings, it is about .070" short. I am working from two kits, so I cut the difference off the second piece for the addition.
I honestly thought these models would be less work, but these kits continue to disappoint. It would be OK if they sold for half the price so you could afford to buy two kits to use for the corrections. It's why I started scratchbuilding years ago.
pbudzik wrote:
I honestly thought these models would be less work, but these kits continue to disappoint. It would be OK if they sold for half the price so you could afford to buy two kits to use for the corrections. It's why I started scratchbuilding years ago.
Paul
You damned near gave me a coronary........somebody noticed!!!!! I'd say at most they're worth 1/3 the retail price, more like 1/4 the MSRP. Disappoint is a bit of an understatement. I really feel sorry for the poor pooch they keep screwing.
How do I get the pen to write here? Now my screen's all smeared with ink.........
Hey Paul, are you fixing the superstructure deck level height as well?
For those that don't know, it looks like when Trumpeter designed the kit they measured the height and then forgot to subtract the thickness of the piece representing the deck; so you wind up with a level that's about 2mm too tall. I decided at the time just to glue it together and live with it, but after mulling it over a while I don't think ht would be that difficult to whack most of the inner section off and make new bulkheads of the correct height for it to rest upon.
But I'm wondering if anyone else who's plunged into the Trumpeter kit has thought of other ways to fix this.
Ron,
I know it is an understatement, but my mama raised me with "If you can't say something nice...
I never minded fixing up an old Monogram airplane. They were cheap, you bought two or three and had a good time, but these babies ain't cheap.
I just try and bite my tongue, but it's been getting a bit raw.
Tracy,
I replaced the weather deck, so I cut the first level of the superstructure down to match the drawing. It makes the secondary battery look a lot better.
pbudzik wrote:Ron,
I know it is an understatement, but my mama raised me with "If you can't say something nice...
I never minded fixing up an old Monogram airplane. They were cheap, you bought two or three and had a good time, but these babies ain't cheap.
I just try and bite my tongue, but it's been getting a bit raw.
Paul
25 years in aerospace/defense manufacturing taught me to hammer bad products before they become an entrenched problem.....especially overpriced really bad products. You're doing an amazing job fixing the piece of junk, I don't have the patience to do that major a fix that shouldn't be needed in the first place.......did enough of that for serious money in my life, don't need to do it for a hobby.
How do I get the pen to write here? Now my screen's all smeared with ink.........
CWatson wrote:
So I would like to confirm the colors used on Washington's MS. 12 Mod paint scheme carried in 42'.
Most of the hull above waterline: Sea Blue (5-S)
(for some reason I always thought it was some sort of dark grey here)
5-N and 5-O on the hull, 5-O and 5-H above the deck but both she and North Carolina carried the 5-N up a little into the #1 and #3 turrets, also check along the 01 level and the lower part of the barbette for turret #2.
I forgot to ask. During what time period was the 5-S replaced by 5-N?
The ships camouflage site does not mention when.
