Guest wrote:According to the date chronology of Mr. Stlllwell's book Arizona on page 320 he states that Arizona entered the panama canal on 17 Aug. 1934 from the pacific to atlantic and then on page 321 she returned back through on 24-25 Octpber 1934 from atlantic to pacific. I hope this helps you, Hank45
P.S. According to the October date that was the last time the Ariz entered the canal. Hank45
Thanks Hank45
I last date I found was Aug 1931.
Much appreciated!
"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left
port and the other was an atrocious liar."
-Don Bamford
Not sure, his name was Elmo Howard, other than just knowing he was on the ship and related to my mother from her talking about him, I really don't know anymore.
I remember she would get water eyed when she talked about it.
Thanks for asking.
Do you know when the armor was removed from the 5� guns?
I have two pictures one in 1930 with the armor still in place, the second in late 1930�s (possible 1936) without the armor.
Attachments
"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left
port and the other was an atrocious liar."
-Don Bamford
Are you talking about the broadside/casemate guns (5"/51s) on the main deck? Those weren't armored; there were metal plates that could be attached during heavy weather and canvas that covered the openings during other times. The Revell/Banner depiction of them as turrets is wrong. One of the metal pieces was always in place as it was attached to the bulkhead and was used to line up the gun for the removable pieces (they were normally stowed pointing fore and aft parallel to the length of the ship).
Tracy White wrote:Are you talking about the broadside/casemate guns (5"/51s) on the main deck? Those weren't armored; there were metal plates that could be attached during heavy weather and canvas that covered the openings during other times. The Revell/Banner depiction of them as turrets is wrong. One of the metal pieces was always in place as it was attached to the bulkhead and was used to line up the gun for the removable pieces (they were normally stowed pointing fore and aft parallel to the length of the ship).
Yes those are the guns.
So the upper part would be rolled back/stowed when not in heavy seas leaving just the bottom half in place?
"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left
port and the other was an atrocious liar."
-Don Bamford
The bottom half or part was structural; it never went anywhere. Look at the second picture on this Navsource page; you can sort-of see a raised armored looking section. These were the removable plates. Each plate had one porthole in the center, so you can see about how many individual casemate cover pieces there were. the plate in between the gun and the bulkhead inboard of the gun was hinged and had no porthole.
The 12th photo down on this BB-38 page ("U.S. Navy Photograph # 1108-42") shows what Arizona's casemate guns would have looked like with the plates off and the canvas covered rolled up and tied off to the overhead at the top of the case mate openings, but it doesn't show the plate on hinges I mentioned. If you have Paul Stillwell's Arizona book let me know and I'll list some page numbers for you.
Tracy White wrote:The bottom half or part was structural; it never went anywhere. Look at the second picture on this Navsource page; you can sort-of see a raised armored looking section. These were the removable plates. Each plate had one porthole in the center, so you can see about how many individual casemate cover pieces there were. the plate in between the gun and the bulkhead inboard of the gun was hinged and had no porthole.
The 12th photo down on this BB-38 page ("U.S. Navy Photograph # 1108-42") shows what Arizona's casemate guns would have looked like with the plates off and the canvas covered rolled up and tied off to the overhead at the top of the case mate openings, but it doesn't show the plate on hinges I mentioned. If you have Paul Stillwell's Arizona book let me know and I'll list some page numbers for you.
Thanks I see what your saying. I don't have the book but I looked on Amazon and it's available. Looks like a new book buy for me. My first thought was to build the canal crossing using the Dragon 1/700 kit, but now I'm thinking I should go back to using the Revell kit instead. Your thoughts, suggestions?
Thanks again for all the help!
"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left
port and the other was an atrocious liar."
-Don Bamford
Well, it would be better if you want to detail, but it's got issues as well.
Hobby Boss has announced a 1/350th kit. We shall see how it turns out. I don't know if you can wait.
here is a shot from a link for y'all, taken at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard in the early 30's showing the Arizona getting her tripods without the surrounding structure.
Thanks guys for the help, I had always thought they were in a turret, based on pictures and the kits I have. Goes to show a few words are worth a thousand pictures sometimes.
edit update
Well I just spent the last few hours going over all the post on the Arizona,(good thing I was at work) everything I was asking had already been covered.
Thanks again for rehashing it anyway.
Attachments
"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left
port and the other was an atrocious liar."
-Don Bamford
Another question
On the Revell kit near the bow what is this thing that has a wire or rope attachment as seen on Georgius Credidio picture of his ship.
Attachments
"Only two sailors, in my experience, never ran aground. One never left
port and the other was an atrocious liar."
-Don Bamford
Those are indeed paravanes; they were normally stored on deck when not in use. They also didn't tangle the mine chains as much as push against them so that the mine would not come in contact with the hull. Hopefully they would also break the mine's chain so that they would float to the surface where they could be spotted and either blown up or at least avoided.
I am getting ready to plank with real wood the decks of my model Arizona, and my question is were the deck boards butted together or were they staggered? Thanks for your answers Hank45
The planking was staggered. Also planks were used to frame the deck edge and around barbettes and other deck structures. This way the planks did not but against metal but could be faired in against another board.These images give you some idea:
