Calling all USS Enterprise CV-6 fans

[Tracy White]

Don't post others' contact info please. We prefer people use PMs to share addresses.

[Kenny N]

Thanks Tracy, I wasn't sure,I'm kinda new @ this site as far as posting & wouldn't post without first making sure if it was ok are not,Also let me thank you & the others who maintain this site-u guy's really know your stuff! thanks again Kenny

[Tracy White]

We're all just paying it forward... sometime someone's going to ask a question you know the answer to and it'll all be good!

With regard to posting information.... generally we don't like it as it can get your e-mail address harvested by the spam bots. We're a community and we want to keep everyone as safe and sane as possible. But if it's the only way to get in touch with someone......

[Kenny N]

Thanks again Tracy,I didn't think of that honestly-I don't have messaging so I would try to work around it by alternate means -thanks again Kenny

[JTninja]

Im jealous of your visit Kenny, Im all the way out on the west coast

If you wont mind, I think you should load up as many good pics as you got to http://www.flickr.com/ Its an online gallery where you can post all your pictures. This way, not only will I benifit from these pictures, but if you post the link here, everyone will benifit as well.

My work hasnt been updated in a while, since Ive gone and worked on other build (theres a group build on thise forum), but Im slowly starting to pick it up again.
viewtopic.php?f=59&t=58163

[Kenny N]

JT, no problem ONCE I can fiqure out how to pull them out of my windows media library & attach to a file- never done it before-all I usually do on my computer is e-mail,surfing & downloads-I feel like a dummy when it comes to computer's-I have pics on my phone also but can't afford the extra pricing for those services right now i'll get some help from my son & law & I'll try to do it asap once I can get him over here that is,he can do all kinds of things on the computer I don't know how to-but good news I took pics also of the Yorktown,Hornet, some of the Essex class,even the modern Enterprise-I thought I only took about 30 pics but I must've gotten carried away in my excitement well over 50 total-i didn't count-& some of them are pic's of war planes from the ww 2 era to modern time-this is the best naval museum I've ever had the priveledge to go to ! I checked out your group site-you go man !-looking good,BTW where were you able to find the Yorky,I haven't seen one since I was about your age-long time ago or so it seems.I actually had that very same model (Revell ? )when I was 12 or so,same thing happened to mine & ended up on the local swampo ocean floor after taking many a firecracker bombs ha ha-might as well go down with a fight ! I sure wish I had it now. The very first model I ever built as a 10 yr was the USS Arizona & I still remember how proud I was of that model,I had it all the way till I got married the first time in 1980.My grandson is in some of the pic's but there mostly of him sitting in the cockpits of various jets etc so I'll try to pick out the best ones-how many should I send in ? I don't know the site but I'll visit it & see if i can gain info on that-ur computer skills are way above mine but if I do it once i'll remember it -just never did before & I really want to send in some pics of my Arizona, but haven't fiqured out how to go about doing it ,I haven't searched the site & don't want to seem like a dumb u no what I'd like to get some opinions because even though it's not perfect it was the first time I did any scratch building & ONLY the second model I've painted IN MY LIFE ,so I'm anxious to hear some honest opinions from all u guys & constructive criticism will only make u a better modeler-i'm like u in the regard that the more I learn the better I get my 1/350 Arizona is not near as good as the 1/200 turned out,it was my first painted & pe'd model EVER,I gained valuable time by reseaching this site & finding answers just reading the post's out there. I'll try my best to get it done soon as possible-keep up the great modeling ur doing-@ your age there's no telling how good u can become & ur sure off to a great start( man I sure wish I hadn't went 35 yrs between models-don't make that mistake ! the detail of models of yesterday don't compare with the detail of the new kits but they are making more pe & detail sets now-I never heard of pe when I was ur age,so don't let go of it or you'll regret going as long as i did-keep up the good work.I don't have texting so maybe we can figure out another way to contact each other.Tracy's right about the spammers & I don't know why I didn't think about that, if we need to down the road I'm sure we could swap info somhow without posting pertinent info.
thanks Kenny

[Kenny N]

JT, I told u I took over 50 pic's,well did I underestimate it ! I have right @ 210-225 good photos( approx. 25 of my 90 % completed Arizona ) & some of the other museum artifacts including planes-i even took one of a Japanese plane not sure yet,but I belive it is a zero- but I still would have @ least a hundred of the" Lucky E" model.I'm definitly going back though,would u believe I didn't really get a good shot of the lower gun tubs on the hull ( port side only )@ the hanger deck elevation ! I can tell u if this model is indeed accurate ( more research on my part needed ) that @ 1/350 scale & above you will need plenty of styrene rod @ different width's for sure, so I'll have to start stocking up on that,How many pic's are you allowed to post on that site-I do plan to edit some of the photo's that were blurry or had lighting problems-I fiqured out early in taking the pic's to take them @ an angle to reduce the reflection off the display-most of them are stunning as far as showing detail anyway. When I go back this time- soon i hope rehab permitting- ( I had shoulder surgery & have to go 3 times a week ) I will take less photo's (Tracy before I do that how many would be ok ! sorry to bug ya I don't want to send in 200 pic's ya know so I would post the best pic's @ a given number -I took them with a 5 mp camera phone) The model is so big, to get up close shots I had to take picks starting @ the bow all the way around & back. The one good thing though for me anyway is the detail shown !.When I took the pic's I was doing it for my build but I can take some @ a lesser #.I haven't been able to get my son in law over yet-he got in a minor car accident yesterday bit he's ok.Let me know if I can be of any assistance to anyone else also ! thanks Kenny ( ps in the future I will try to keep my post's @ a lesser size )

[Kenny N]

Jt,I just joined the flickr site & when I went to download the desktop software I gat a security warning ( no digital signature ) did u have this problem ? thanks again Kenny

[JTninja]

Hmm, I never downloaded anything to the desktop, I just upload the pictures to the website.

[Kenny N]

Alright JT, I used the basic uploader on flickr & posted a few test pic's of the Lucky E & airgroup,The Yorky,Essex along with a few others,-hope everyone enjoy's them-I will post some more later !-NOW i'll post some pic's of my Trumpy 1/200 build-wished I had a rigging diagram -I don't know if it will ever be truly finished ( is any model ? )so it will always be only 90% complete ha ha-Once I read over the rules & fiqure out how to link with this site............ now to bed got rehab @ 10:30 am-thanks kenny

[Kenny N]

Well I don't know what's up with the flickr site,All I get is a blank sign in page for the last 2 days-oh well ,they were some nice personal photo's too!

[Dick J]

Question and my answer copied from the SN site. I felt it would be appropriate to include it here.

What radar did Enterprise CV-6 receive in June/July of 42? Was it SK or SC? I thought CXAM was the long range air search radar, SC was surface search and I believe SK was another air search radar. Wiper's book I believe says SK and from its accompanying picture it does look like a surface search. Just a confirmation surface search or air search?

If it was another air search radar, why? If it was improved air search why was the CXAM radar still being extensively used during the South Pacific battles?

What did they use for surface search? You would think after the Doolittle Raid and the Japanese fishing trawler getting eyeballs on the task force, surface search would be important tool as well for the Pacific's only flight decks.

Bear with me for I may have my Ss, Cs and Ks mixed up.

Radar was very much a work-in-progress at that time. Generally, the "S" series of radars were Search sets. The "F" series were Fire Control types. But the "CX" types were still exprimental. Only 6 CXAM sets were built and were on Yorktown, California, Pensacola, Northampton, Chester, and Chicago. The CXAM-1 was a modification that mainly changed the antenna for the CXAM, eliminating the "tilt" capability. I don't know the exact numbers, but there were more than 6 CXAM-1's. These were found on Lex, Sara, Ranger, Enterprise and Wasp, among the CV's, an on a number of BB's and CA's. Even still, it remained experimental. The SC was a production set which it was hoped would provide CXAM capability with a lighter antenna. (More power broadcast but with a smaller antenna.) But in practice, it lacked the range of the earlier sets. Later SC variants used a larger antenna. A later production type, SK, essentially added a CXAM-1 size antenna to the higher power output of the SC. It began replacing the earlier sets in '43.

Hornet's first air search set was an SC. At Midway, she was unable to track targets that Enterprise and Yorktown detected at relatively long ranges. Therefore, her SC set was moved to the after mast, and California's CXAM replaced it on the foremast. Sometime between Midway and Santa Cruz, Enterprise received new radars. Whether they were all installed at the same time, I don't know. She received an SC series as a back-up for the CXAM-1, SG for surface search, and FD (MK-4) for the MK-33 directors. The FD's for sure, and most probably the SG were added during her post-Eastern Solomons repairs at Pearl. (Portland received the same two types at that same time.)

As for the surface sets (SG), they were a priority even before the Doolittle Raid. However, they were brand new. The earliest photos I have seen show them in May of '42. Their importance shows in the number of sets installed by Pearl during the second half of '42 - they weren't waiting for stateside refits. It took some time for production to ramp up, and due to operational needs, sets were only installed when ships returned for some other needed work/repairs.

[Michael Vorrasi]

Question and my answer copied from the SN site. I felt it would be appropriate to include it here.

What radar did Enterprise CV-6 receive in June/July of 42? Was it SK or SC? I thought CXAM was the long range air search radar, SC was surface search and I believe SK was another air search radar. Wiper's book I believe says SK and from its accompanying picture it does look like a surface search. Just a confirmation surface search or air search?

If it was another air search radar, why? If it was improved air search why was the CXAM radar still being extensively used during the South Pacific battles?

What did they use for surface search? You would think after the Doolittle Raid and the Japanese fishing trawler getting eyeballs on the task force, surface search would be important tool as well for the Pacific's only flight decks.

Bear with me for I may have my Ss, Cs and Ks mixed up.

Radar was very much a work-in-progress at that time. Generally, the "S" series of radars were Search sets. The "F" series were Fire Control types. But the "CX" types were still exprimental. Only 6 CXAM sets were built and were on Yorktown, California, Pensacola, Northampton, Chester, and Chicago. The CXAM-1 was a modification that mainly changed the antenna for the CXAM, eliminating the "tilt" capability. I don't know the exact numbers, but there were more than 6 CXAM-1's. These were found on Lex, Sara, Ranger, Enterprise and Wasp, among the CV's, an on a number of BB's and CA's. Even still, it remained experimental. The SC was a production set which it was hoped would provide CXAM capability with a lighter antenna. (More power broadcast but with a smaller antenna.) But in practice, it lacked the range of the earlier sets. Later SC variants used a larger antenna. A later production type, SK, essentially added a CXAM-1 size antenna to the higher power output of the SC. It began replacing the earlier sets in '43.

Hornet's first air search set was an SC. At Midway, she was unable to track targets that Enterprise and Yorktown detected at relatively long ranges. Therefore, her SC set was moved to the after mast, and California's CXAM replaced it on the foremast. Sometime between Midway and Santa Cruz, Enterprise received new radars. Whether they were all installed at the same time, I don't know. She received an SC series as a back-up for the CXAM-1, SG for surface search, and FD (MK-4) for the MK-33 directors. The FD's for sure, and most probably the SG were added during her post-Eastern Solomons repairs at Pearl. (Portland received the same two types at that same time.)

As for the surface sets (SG), they were a priority even before the Doolittle Raid. However, they were brand new. The earliest photos I have seen show them in May of '42. Their importance shows in the number of sets installed by Pearl during the second half of '42 - they weren't waiting for stateside refits. It took some time for production to ramp up, and due to operational needs, sets were only installed when ships returned for some other needed work/repairs.

Dick, good summary. I have seen it theorized that Hornet's CXAM antenna, salvaged from California, may have actually been paired up with a second SC electronics suite. If so, it would have been very close to CXAM/CXAM-1's successor, the SK series, in actual performance. Any thoughts on this? I have never found hard evidence to support it, but it certainly seems like something that might have been tried out. I've always wondered as well, if Enterprise had any upgrades to her Mk.33 directors to slave them to the FD Mk.4's, or were they just manually slewed and elevated to match the radar returns? The Mk. 33 was of course, never designed to be integrated with radar. Also, I believe CV-6 got the second SC version, SC-2, as she had the wider rectangular antenna.

[Dick J]

Friedman made that suggestion, but didn't recognize that the SC was retained intact aft. Knowing that the SC was moved, not just replaced, makes it very unlikely that the CXAM antenna was linked to any of the SC's components. As for mods to the MK-33's, that is also unlikely. The time constraints would make that difficult. (Aug 24 to Oct 26 with transits to and from Pearl, and with a bit of "loiter" time before and after the transits, doesn't leave much time for such technical work.) The MK-4 would be slaved to the MK-33 to provide range more than providing true "blind fire" capability. That was very important in the pre-VT fuse days.

[Rich Mathsen]

Regarding the Mk 4 radar on the Mk 33 directors: I always thought these were added post-Eastern Solomons, but this picture, from the onluine library at NHHC says it was taken on August 7, 1942:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/imag ... 07859c.htm

Look closely at the Mk 33 and you'll see the Mk 4 radar in a lowered position. Maybe they got the datge wrong, but...

Regards,
Rich Mathsen

[Dick J]

Nice catch! Two things tend to confirm the date. By Santa Cruz, the flag bridge (visible in this photo) had been removed. Also, the 1.1's had been replaced by quad 40MM with the associated directors. This photo is post-Midway but pre-Santa Cruz.

One comment on the caption. The 1.1 might have had a splinter screen. However, on Yorktown and Enterprise, the tub was toward the back of the clipping-room structure. There was enough room forward of the tub to place canvas dodgers on the rail forward of the tub. The dodgers are not proof of the absence of the tub.

[Jerry Phillips]

Wow...interesting!! Hard to argue w/ photos. POSSIBLY Mk4 atop Mk33's by Aug 1942....the search is on.

Jerry Phillips

[Jerry Phillips]

Mk-4 Radar.......found another photo, Aug 7 1942. Page 38, from Steve Ewing's "USS Enterprise" pictorial history, shows the fwd Mk33 w/ Mk4 Radar atop. Don't know why I missed this before............looking for others.

Jerry Phillips

[Michael Vorrasi]

Regarding the Mk 4 radar on the Mk 33 directors: I always thought these were added post-Eastern Solomons, but this picture, from the onluine library at NHHC says it was taken on August 7, 1942:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/imag ... 07859c.htm

Look closely at the Mk 33 and you'll see the Mk 4 radar in a lowered position. Maybe they got the date wrong, but...

Regards,
Rich Mathsen

Nice catch on the photo Rich. Can't believe I did not have this one saved in my files! I believe the date is correct. The 1.1" s are still in place and the lower flag bridge platform has not yet been removed. These were changed in the post-Eastern Solomons repairs and refit, so they would not be there unless the date was not correct, or very close. My guess is that the Mk.4's were installed during the post Midway refit.

[Dick J]

After reviewing the photos, maybe we shouldn't discout ALL of the previous info on the MK-4's. Both versions may have been half right. Check the photo at the top of page 25 of the Ewing book. (Its caption is at the bottom of page 41 - the photos were swapped, but not the captions.) It is clearly Enterprise with Eastern Solomons damage. There does not appear to be a MK-4 on the after director. Also, no MK-4 is visible on the after director in the shot on page 38. (Bad angle but still no radar visible.) So, did Enterprise receive the forward MK-4 shortly after Midway, but then wait until after Eastern Solomons to mount the after one?