Were the propeller shaft struts tapered on the leading edge (and the trailing edge too) on the Buchanan and less specifically all Gleaves class DD? Just looking at those parts C7 and C8 and seeing the squared off thick strut arm makes me think that in true 1:1 scale that would cause a lot of drag and turbulence. Anyone looked at pictures of DDs in drydock in that area?
Just made me wonder.
Timm Smith Learn something new about the ship or your job every day. Ignorance is not bliss aboard a warship in wartime. Ignorance could cost the life of yourself, a shipmate, or the loss of the ship.
- Personal Information Booklet CV- 38
Yes they were. The ones in the kit are better than most. A few minutes with a sanding stick and you should be good to go. Here is a link to photo of Kidd's (DD-661) struts - no real difference. http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2345/186 ... bb.jpg?v=0
I thought I had scans of Benson-Gleaves out of the water showing the props, struts, rudder area ... but I could not find any. But, I have scanned a few Fletchers and I suspect the construction techniques were similar ...
In the following order: Radford (DD-446) as building, Sigsbee (DD-502) at Pearl Harbor without the struts in place (but you can see how the shaft entered the hull) being repaired from Kamikaze damage in 1945, Conner (DD-582) building, and Twiggs (DD-591) building. Hope these help.
It looks very similar to the profile of the Essex class carrier I just built.
New question...
How wide is the boot topping on these Gleaves class DDs?
Thanks again
Timm Smith Learn something new about the ship or your job every day. Ignorance is not bliss aboard a warship in wartime. Ignorance could cost the life of yourself, a shipmate, or the loss of the ship.
- Personal Information Booklet CV- 38
For what it's worth, the struts were designed from the start to be wing shaped. However they were overly simplified for the molding process. As I look at the way the parts came out I am a little disappointed as I spent a lot of time on that feature.
Cadman,
Those struts look great, even though they didn't make it to production!
A follow-up question on the boot topping, would the stripe be above, below, or somewhere in between the seam on the hull on the Dragon Buchanan?
Thanks
Timm Smith Learn something new about the ship or your job every day. Ignorance is not bliss aboard a warship in wartime. Ignorance could cost the life of yourself, a shipmate, or the loss of the ship.
- Personal Information Booklet CV- 38
I put mine above the seam, judging by the paint guide and looking at the very stern, where the bottom edge of the boot is at the "corner" where the hull bottom turns up and into the vertical portion.
I building USS LANSDOWNE in her commissioning Measure 12 (mod). I am confused by the color blue applied to the hull in Measure 12. Tracy, your work on the Ship Camouflage website calls for 5-S. Dragon calls for 5-N for Buchanan. Can I assume that 5-S correct? Thanks!
Timm Smith Learn something new about the ship or your job every day. Ignorance is not bliss aboard a warship in wartime. Ignorance could cost the life of yourself, a shipmate, or the loss of the ship.
- Personal Information Booklet CV- 38
Well after quite a bit of reading, guessing, trying to figure out changes from maesure 12 to measure 21, I guess I will do the USS Aaron Ward, I like the scheme better than the Buchanan and it will take minimal work to convert her over. I have collected a few pictures, but am looking for a better picture of her port side MS12 camoufalge, are there any better shots out there than on NAVSOURCE?
All the images I have of Aaron Ward duplicate either/and Navsource and Destroyer History websites. Here is one of the same ones they have, but limitation in file size necessary here, it won't be as detailed as a full file.
Charles Landrum wrote:I am confused by the color blue applied to the hull in Measure 12. Tracy, your work on the Ship Camouflage website calls for 5-S. Dragon calls for 5-N for Buchanan. Can I assume that 5-S correct?
If 5-S is correct, then the mistake on the Dragon sheet would be mine. I was under the impression that 5N would have been used by the time she went to sea.
Any one know the dimensions of the depth charges carried by US destroyers? I've read that there were 300lb and 600lb types, but haven't found the sizes. I'm thinking about replacing the Buchanan kit depth charge racks with either scratch-built or PE racks. Thanks. Barry
I'm not sure of which Buchanan kit you are working on ... 1942 or 1945. Buchanan in 1942 had the "post-style" of storage for spare Mk-6 300-lb depth charges. She eventually had these replaced with the roller rack storage racks. If you are interested in replacing the stern drop racks, they dropped Mk-4 600-lb depth charges early in the war. Newer fast sink depth charges came into use in late WWII and required changes to the racks.
The depth charge drop racks were different depending on which type of depth charges were used and how many were carried. I don't know right off the top of my head the dimensions and drawings for these, except from some drawings/books from Floating Drydock or the BIW Fletcher Design Drawings. But, I'm not sure that the stern drop tracks used on Fletchers were the same as on Benson-Gleaves destroyers.
Thanks, Rick. I'm modeling Ellyson (DD-454) in February 1942 using the Buchanan 1942 kit. The best photo I have shows 8 depth charges on roll-off racks. If they were Mark 6, with 18" diameter, 0.050 styrene rod would be pretty close, I think. Barry
The stern drop charges would be the 600-lb size (Mk 4). You should be able to measure the size used for these in the Buchanan kit. Just build your own replacements to suit.
One thing I noticed in building up the Dragon kit is that the boat boom is missing. Here is a mid-war pic of LANSDOWNE that shows boom in place on the starboard side, stowed for sea, below the bridge.
The hinge point is outboard the forward davit arm. The boom stay attaches at the lower edge of the bridge wing - note the turnbuckle near the top. The boom is a spar tapered at each end. I have seen them on other ships too, although I have never seen one on the port side. The Caine Mutiny shows a nicely varnished boom on the starboard side and none to port..
A quick survey of images I have scanned seems to show no boat boom being installed on the Federal-built Gleaves class destroyers from DD-483 through 488. I see it installed on DD-489 as delivered. I'm guessing it was a "modification" to the class or to some ships(?) and may have been added to Lansdowne in the 1943 refit??? Lansdowne didn't have it in that location when she was delivered. Not sure about Buchanan, I don't have starboard side photos of Buchanan in this period until 1944 and even then she does NOT appear to have a boat boom on either the port or starboard side in this location. I notice that when the boom is there, one of the two life rafts is moved aft.
Rick, good information. Since I am building Lansdowne in her 1942 configuration I will leave it off then.
You would not happen to have a starboard view of her Measure 12 (mod) camo? I recall you posting that the Kearny ship primarily were photographed on the port side, so my expectations are low.
