The Ship Model Forum

Dick, you truly are an encyclopedia of naval information. Thank you. Being that I have some of those kits in my stash, I should be able to use the directors in those kits as a guide to making new ones for Cleveland, but I'll also check out pictures of them as well.

You can see how oversized the directors look on the model (which needs quite a bit of work, so please mind the mess!).

_________________
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

Ship Model Gallery

Martin,

The July '42 photo of Cleveland that you posted on this thread on Fri May 16, 2008 12:34 pm shows the MK-34 with an earlier MK-3 radar, if that helps. I believe only Cleveland and Columbia (in this class, at least) carried the MK-3.

Dick,

Yes, I noticed the radar - thanks. Digging through kits last night, the Niko Nashville has the nicest pair - of Mk 34 directors, that is. I may cast copies of those to use.

_________________
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

Ship Model Gallery

Actually there are plastic models but not in 1/350. There are two kits USS Cleveland CL-55 and USS Miami CL-89(probably this one might be useful for CL-103). Both are in 1/700 however. Both are originally made by Pit Road, although you might also find them in Midshipmodels boxes(grab either one you find - they are quiite nicely done)

Hi....I went through the list of cruiser model builders.
Am I the only 1/96 scale Cleveland Class CL modeler oooout heeere???
Bob Platz

Hi....On 12/9/2009 I asked if I was the only 1/96 scale Cleveland Class CL modeler out there?
I guess I am. There were no responses to my question! Does that mean I'm the only guy that thinks the Clevelands were great ships to model?
Happy modeling........Bob Platz

They are great ships to model (see Luciano's 1/350th build in the Works in Progress section), but there are only a very few here who have the means to build a 1/96 scale model. Perhaps you would like to share your build in the Scratchbuilding and R/C section?

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Timmy C. Hi...Thanks for the response to my Cleveland Class CL request.
I was just curious if there were any other 1/96 Cleveland CL modelers out there that I could contact.
Thanks again...Happy modeling
Bob Platz

Bgire,

Regarding the USS Little Rock's trip to Buffalo.... here's a link that should answer your questions.

http://www.usslittlerock.org/Little_Rock_in_Buffalo.html

and here is link to a site where the details of a model of the USS Oklahoma City are described:

http://www.okieboat.com/Modeling%20info.html

As you might know, the USS Galveston, USS Little Rock and the USS Oklahoma City were all Cleveland class cruisers, converted in the late 1950's to Galveston class missile cruisers.

Hope this helps somewhat.

Hello to all. I am in the process of building my 1/350 USS Mobile and in my research of as many photos that I can find of ships of this class I noticed that there are no ranging optics on any of the sternmost 6" turrets. I assumed that they were superfiring (two turrets being controled by one director). However after seeing Pierre Marshalls' gallery entry today and seeing turret optics on his sternmost 6" er, the faith in my research is a little shaken. I know his ships are magnificent and known for accuracy. However I know Mobile, Montpelier, Denver, Houston, Galveston, Astoria, Pasadena, Birmingham, Cleveland, and Biloxi had no ranging optics there. I have definitive picts of them. Does anyone know if all ships of the Cleveland class or am I seeing things? Any assistance would be much appreciated. Thanks Keith Hufnagel

This is a common mistake many modelers (and companies) make. The Cleveland's were derived from the Helena design, which in turn was derived from the original Brooklyn. There was NO rangefinder in the aftermost turret in any of them - ever. (Pierre Marshal also missed the stern contour. At the waterline, the Cleveland was essentially unchanged from the Brooklyn. The stern was only fully rounded at the maindeck level, making some fairly complex curves in the actual ship's structure.)

As an FYI, we just released our new Round Bridge USS Cleveland CL-55 in 1/350th scale.

She is in her as-commissioned 1942 fit complete with boat deck & cranes.

_________________
John Sheridan
Yankee Modelworks

To Yankee modelworks: you might want add a note in your kits about the after turrets

Also, watch the radar on the MK-34's. Cleveland carried MK-3 on both until sometime after the boats were removed and the twin 40MM were added on the maindeck amidships. By 1944, MK-8 was carried on the forward director only. The after one still carried the MK-3.

Bob,

I am working on a 1:96 model of the USS Oklahoma City CLG-5 - a modified Cleveland class ship. After that is finished I plan to build another 1:96 of the original WWII configuration. I am constructing a 3D CAD model as well as the 1:96 real model. I am working from the original blueprints and lots of photos to try to get the models as accurate as possible.

http://www.okieboat.com

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

Thinking over previous posts about the Clevelands, I was wondering if anyone has seen a detailed listing of the differences between the Cleveland class ships? I am interested in the configurations from commissioning all the way to decommissioning.

For example, the Cleveland CL-55 was originally designed with 1.1 inch and 50 caliber machine guns, plus four quad 40mm Bofors. By the time she was commissioned (I think) the 1.1 inch and 50 calibers had been eliminated and replaced with 20mm Olerikins and dual 40mm Bofors. Eventually additional 20mm were added to the bow and stern, and near the end of the war the 20mms on the stern were replaced with dual 40mm in gun tubs cantilevered from the hull.

The number and arrangement of the dual 40mm and 20mm guns varied from ship to ship, depending upon what was available in the yards while they were being built. Then, during the war additional 20mm guns were added when the ships were in for repairs. Does anyone know of an accurate list of the armament changes on these ships during the war?

Were any dual 20mm guns added to any of the Clevelands?

I have also noticed three general configurations for the trash burner stacks plus various arrangements of boats and 20mm galleries amidship. I am interested in these small details, like the shape of the supports under the fore quad 40mm gun tubs mentioned earlier.

Someone asked about the boats. As noted the boat cranes were eliminated early in the war to reduce topside weight, as was the boat farm amidships with all of it's highly flammable gasoline. The ships were then equipped with one or two 26 foot motor whale boats. These were hung in davits similar to those on the Fletcher class (and others) destroyers. The davits were typically located on the main deck amidships or just outboard of the after smoke pipe (funnel) and forward of the #4 and #5 dual 5"/38 handling rooms, depending upon where the 20mm and dual 40mm guns were added on the main deck and O1 level. I am not certain, but from the photos that were available it appears that some ships had only one motor whale boat, typically on the starboard side. However, some definitely had boats on both sides.

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

I have researched some of the differences between ships in the past, at least based on the available photos, but have never put them into a table form or listed them as changes by date. If you have a few specific ships in mind, or a specific goal in mind, perhaps I could give you a few areas to look at for differences. Cleveland herself commissioned with the 4 twin 40MM in the original 1.1 locations. (No quads as built or designed.) Columbia and Montpelier replaced the forward twins with quads aft of the forward beam 5" mounts. These were on somewhat square supports. Denver and later ships used rounded supports, and when Cleveland finally received her quads, the supports were rounded, as in the later ships. Cleveland and Columbia commissioned with MK-3 radar on the MK-34 directors. The others all commissioned with the MK-8 fire control radar. There are many more differences (and areas of identification) but with 27 ships completed as cruisers, they are simply too numerous to list here.

I tried several years back to catalog the configuration changes for the CLEVELAND class and found it difficult. The first seven or so completed units went through numerous changes. As the authorized armament changed for the class (or sub-groups with-in the class), the changes were made unless a further change superseded it before a yard period was accomplished. The next five units went through just a couple of major changes. Yes twin 20-mm mounts were installed starting in early to mid-1945, I can't remember the number of twin mounts right now and which single mounts they replaced. The CLEVELAND class was always weight and space limited and it prevented the addition of more 40-mm mounts. I was surprised that MANCHESTER was the only one of the class to get twin 3-in mounts and then she got eight of them in 1953!!!

To really track these ships configurations will require a fair amount of work. I started by listing all units in order by commission date and noted which of four builders built them. Then I went on photo searches. I started to note when changes in configuration (mostly 40-mm mounts). After a point I gave up trying to find when updates occurred, I just didn't have enough data. I didn't even try tracking numbers of 20-mm guns mounted. To do it right, I need to spend time at NARA and I have other priorities. Here is a thumbnail of what I found.

The original "round-face" bridge units were the first commissioned;

CL-55 CLEVELAND -- 15 June 1942 -- 4x2-40mm mounts (8-40mm)
CL-56 COLUMBIA -- 29 June 1942 -- 2x4 & 2x2-40mm mounts (12-40mm)
CL-57 MONTPELIER -- 9 September 1942 -- same
CL-58 DENVER -- 15 October 1942 -- same
CL-60 SANTA FE -- 24 November 1942 -- same?
CL-62 BIRMINGHAM -- 29 January 1943 -- 2x4 & 4x2-40mm mounts (16-40mm)
CL-63 MOBILE -- 24 March 1943 -- same

The "squared-face" bridge units were next;

CL-80 BILOXI -- 31 August 1943 -- 4x4 & 4x2-40mm mounts (20-40mm) Edit: Should be 4x4 and 2x2-40mm mounts
CL-81 HOUSTON -- 20 December 1943 -- same
CL-89 MIAMI -- 28 December 1943 -- same
CL-64 VINCENNES -- 21 January 1944 -- same
CL-90 ASTORIA -- 17 May 1944 -- same
CL-65 PASADENA -- 8 June 1944 -- 4x4 & 6x2-40mm (28-40mm)

From PASADENA on all units were commissioned (one suspended) with 28-40mm guns. The last five units ... PROVIDENCE, LITTLE ROCK, PORTSMOUTH, MANCHESTER, and GALVESTON (suspended basically complete and mothballed ... not commissioned as a gun cruiser), had two of the twin 40-mm mounts relocated from amidships to the fantail. Other units had this same upgrade.

Rick,

Thanks. I have been making a list (not well organized) of differences between ships that I have observed (I have many high resolution images of all of the Cleveland class ships). Someday I will organize it and post the list so others can comment and make corrections. Don't hold your breath, it will be a while!

One of confusing factors is that planned changes were not made until the ships returned to the yards. Many of these ships (especially the early ones) didn't return to regular ship yards, but had modifications made at Ulithi after suffering combat damage. Who knows what changes were made in the rush of damage repair?

One thing that makes the task simpler is that significant modifications were made only when the ship entered a shipyard or repair facility, and those dates are recorded in the ships' histories.

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

When I got the bug about looking into this class, I had just gotten several kits of the Pitroad/Skywave CLEVELAND class with intentions of building CLEVELAND at Torch, DAYTON as completed, and MANCHESTER with those twin 3-in mounts. I was unsure of CLEVELAND's configuration in November 1942 at that time and got curious about the transition in configurations for the class during the war. I had a series of business trips that had me not too far from USNI and I spent several four hour searches looking through their photo collection taking notes. I have in recent years started to research official records/photos at NARA and NHHC for USN destroyers and looked at CLEVELAND as a special case and went through her BuShips photo file at NARA. I will at some point do the same for the remaining sisters in the class ... but I still have a lot of destroyers to go.

I have notes for transition configurations for several of the class, but the dates are based on photos and may or may not match actual mod dates. I figured documenting the starting configurations for the class was a good start. The first seven (round-face bridge) units are the ones with the most unusual configurations and most extensive war service records to boot.