Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

[apfelzra]

Hi Hornet fans,

I am nearing the completion of my 1:350 Trump Hornet (after major modifications to the forward third of the hull -- more on that in a subsequent posting) with both GMM photoetch sets and now am turning my attention to her air wing. My model will show the ship as she appeared at the start of the Battle of Santa Cruz in October 1942; I have removed the catapult sponsons and added the bow quad 1.1-in. mount (without rangefinder) with a modified splinter shield. What combination of letters and numbers would I use on the fuselages for the Dauntless divebombers, Wildcat fighters and TBD/TBF torpedo bombers? I have a healthy selection of number and letter decals. Thanks for your advice.

Bob Apfelzweig

[Bondoman]

Fred Branyan would be a good source.

[Michael Vorrasi]

Hi Hornet fans,

I am nearing the completion of my 1:350 Trump Hornet (after major modifications to the forward third of the hull -- more on that in a subsequent posting) with both GMM photoetch sets and now am turning my attention to her air wing. My model will show the ship as she appeared at the start of the Battle of Santa Cruz in October 1942; I have removed the catapult sponsons and added the bow quad 1.1-in. mount (without rangefinder) with a modified splinter shield. What combination of letters and numbers would I use on the fuselages for the Dauntless divebombers, Wildcat fighters and TBD/TBF torpedo bombers? I have a healthy selection of number and letter decals. Thanks for your advice.

Bob Apfelzweig

Starfighter Decals has the set for the full airgroup in 1/350.

[Jerry Phillips]

Hornet Airgroup, Oct 26 1942:

CHAG 1 TBF-1
VF-72 38 F4F-4's
VB-8 15 SBD-3's
VS-8 16 SBD-3's
VT-6 15 TBF-1's

VF-72 had white no#s fwd of fuselage star (no designator), VT-6 had black no#s fwd of fuselage star (no designator). VB-8 had black fuselage codes i.e. "B-1" fwd of fuselage star, while VS-8 had white fuselage codes i.e. "S-1" fwd of fuselage star. I dont know about the CHAGs TBF markings. All aircraft would have their individual plane numbers atop top of wings near root. (in either black or white). I wont get into nose numerals! This is the info Ive gathered, if anybody has any corrections please let me know!

Jerry

[Jerry Phillips]

Oops....one correction (so far)....VS-8. The white fuselage codes (ex. "S-1") would be aft of the fuselage star, NOT fwd of star.

Sorry,
Jerry

[MartinJQuinn]

Fred asked me to post the following for him, as he's having some computer issues:

Just stumbled on to the recent posts.

I salute Jerry for his source of info, I have been searching for that info for years.

If you want to put the photos below on, the top ones are stills from footage of the Doolittle raid. Perhaps Jerry can let us know if these planes remained on board. If they did, note the unusual practice of putting the side number on the leading edge of the wing. I have NARA footage from Coral Sea era showing the same thing. Not obvious in these stills but the numbers were centered on center of the curve on the leading edge.

Despite several search attempts for plane photos the only post Midway Hornet plane photo I ever found is the TBF at the bottom. Not sure if it will show up at your end but trust me the fuselage side number is T-16 forward of the star and it also appears in white on the cowl ring even with the prop.

I have a photo of a Guadalcanal era CV8 TBF, black side number T-16 as Jerry describes, also has the side number in white on the cowl ring level with the prop. Not sure if Doolittle Raid VS8 SBDs were retained thru Santa Cruz, if yes I have a still from footage of them with the white side number repeated on the leading edge of the wing.

See photos below. The last photo is a Hornet TBF during the Guadalcanal landings.

[Jerry Phillips]

Fred...thank you for the corrections corncerning VT-6's TBF markings....black "T-1", fwd of fuselage star. I was basing my incorrect assumptions on VT-10 markings for OCT. 1942. I also have one correction to make regarding VB-8....the codes "B-1" would have been AFT of the fuselage star (not fwd as I stated). There are several photos of VB-8/VS-8 during Midway Battle, and I believe that the markings where the same at Santa Cruz. There are several photos of VF-72 F4F-4's during Santa Cruz, so I believe my statements are correct.


Jerry

[FRED BRANYAN]

Hello Jerry

I have no photos of VF 72 planes, although there is a drawing of one in the Lundstrom book. If possible, could you please email me any photos you might have?

I was in touch with 2 ship photographers both of whom told me most post Midway photos and footage went down at Santa Cruz. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the SBDs were all replaced prior to departure for Guadalcanal, allegedly because they were somewhat ragged already when issued before the Doolittle Raid, but I do not trust my memory and have no idea if that is correct. I am in touch with Jim Sawruk, who can probably be described as a certified expert on the ship, and will send him an email to see if he knows.

In any event, thanks for sharing this info with us. It is most helpful and I know a lot of folks have been searching for it for a long time.

Regards,

Fred Branyan
fredb1048@aol.com

[FRED BRANYAN]

Greetings all

I sent an email to Jim Sawruk on the current topic of HAG plane markings at Santa Cruz, and he sent me the reply copied below.

if anyone needs photos to confirm what Jim says about the TBF at the starboard rear of the island, let me know, I have 2 ot them. One of the 2 I think is unpublished. If you enlarge the well known shot taken from starboard just priot to the Val impact with the water shot up beside the ship, you will see the plane facing forward. If you enlarge it enough the star on the wing should become visible. Needless to say this is a detail that would apply to a Santa Cruz model of the ship only.

Fred Branyan
Fredb1048 <at> aol.com

Most of HORNET's aircraft are those that she deployed with but she picked up some WASP SBDs as replacements after her loss.
the VT-6 markings are correct and look in John's GUADALCANAL book for photos of a SBD and a VF-72 F4F. I think they are there. The SBDs are essentially the same markings as at MIDWAY.
If you are going to do a model of HORNET from mid-September 1942 on, do not forget the fuselage of the VT-6 TBF outboard of the island. It had been damaged in landing and was used for spares up until she was lost.

Best to all,
Jim Sawruk

[John W.]

So this should be an easy question to answer after all the other esoterica in this thread. I was thinking on how I was going to do the airports / portholes on my HORNET as I finish the hull in the next few months. I have thought of several ways to get nice round portholes with black or dark gray 'glass'. I am specifically modeling the Doolittle launch and I thought - "Wait a minute, the ship would be at GQ after the business with the picket boat. Mitscher rushed the launch because of the concern the Japanese might attack at any time so I assume the ship did not stand down from GQ before the launch. I would think that in that condition, all the airport / porthole covers - at least those in the hull - would probably be closed." So my question is, what color would the airport / porthole cover show when it was closed? My guess would be something like Ocean Gray (5-O) like the hull, or maybe a lighter gray like interior gray. Anyone know? This isn't that academic to me - if the color was a medium gray or similar, the porthole 'glass' color should not be black or anything dark. It would make the airports / portholes more difficult to see at a distance from the model. Obviously this answer would apply to other ships in a similar alert state.
Thoughts?

[Tracy White]

Same color as the hull.

[amiers]

Hi all. just starting my 1/350 Hornet. few questions i need answered.

1. colours for painting at Midway, hull, deck and island

2. best aftermarket 1.1 quads

thanks

[carr]

..

[John W.]

Same color as the hull.

Tracy, thanks.

[Michael Vorrasi]

So this should be an easy question to answer after all the other esoterica in this thread. I was thinking on how I was going to do the airports / portholes on my HORNET as I finish the hull in the next few months. I have thought of several ways to get nice round portholes with black or dark gray 'glass'. I am specifically modeling the Doolittle launch and I thought - "Wait a minute, the ship would be at GQ after the business with the picket boat. Mitscher rushed the launch because of the concern the Japanese might attack at any time so I assume the ship did not stand down from GQ before the launch. I would think that in that condition, all the airport / porthole covers - at least those in the hull - would probably be closed." So my question is, what color would the airport / porthole cover show when it was closed? My guess would be something like Ocean Gray (5-O) like the hull, or maybe a lighter gray like interior gray. Anyone know? This isn't that academic to me - if the color was a medium gray or similar, the porthole 'glass' color should not be black or anything dark. It would make the airports / portholes more difficult to see at a distance from the model. Obviously this answer would apply to other ships in a similar alert state.
Thoughts?

John, I'm hopefully about to make your job easy. First, she was completed with far fewer hull portholes that CV5 or CV6, so don't go by Yorktown plans as they have many many more portholes. There was only a row along the deck just below the hangar deck, and along the foc'sle above hangar level. All of Hornet's portholes below hangar deck level, save a few amidships, were covered with plates and welded closed before she sailed for the war zone. The remaining ones below hangar deck level were covered over in her July 1942 availability at PHNY, after it was noted how far Yorktown listed and still stayed afloat. (I believe that Yorktown and Enterprise also had this done, in stages, as well. Part of wartime preparations to improve watertight integrity). As for portholes themselves, I think a somewhat glossy charcoal gray color works best if open (I'm thinking a sharp lead pencil works well here better than paint), if closed, the color of the surrounding camo. The windows were swung in and metal plates then swung out to close the opening. They were not glass exposed on the exterior when closed.


Here you can see the abbreviated row of portholes initially left in place, mostly amidships, below hangar level in early 1942. Also note the island portholes, some open, some closed. The closed ones show only the metal porthole covers in matching camo color to surrounding area, and they have a star like frame work of stiffeners on them:



Here you can see the metal plates welded over her below-hangar deck portholes. They are camo color.

[amiers]

Can anyone give me the width of the boot topping on Hornet in 1/350?, and the right position.

thanks

[Michael Vorrasi]

Can anyone give me the width of the boot topping on Hornet in 1/350?, and the right position.

thanks

It should be six feet. Check out Maritime Quest photos of Hornet in drydock on pages 4 and 5. (It looks narrower in these shots because the lower part is all grungy.
http://www.maritimequest.com/warship_di ... page_5.htm
If you go to page 2 and the second shot down, note the bottom of the first trough after the bow cut-water wave. It shows the lower line and there is a bit of anti fouling red showing. She is riding high here, as she's lightly loaded, so almost all the boot topping is above water.

[apfelzra]

Hi Hornet fans,

I am about 98% finished with my Trumpeter 1:350 USS Hornet (still awaiting delivery of the last quad 1.1-in. mount and additional 20mm Oerlikons from L'Arsenal USA) but thought I would post some photos of how I solved (or, at least, moderated) the serious problem of the misshapen forward third of the hull. My solution, which did not fully rectify Trumpeter's awful tubby shape, was to cut a slab of solid hardwood (poplar, in this case -- cheap and closed-grain) roughly in the existing shape of the forward third of the lower hull, place a shorter piece atop it for the bow forward of the flared 5-in. gun mounts, and then fill in around between the wood and the plastic (now with the upper hull glued to the lower hull) with Elmer's Wood Putty. This material is cheap and easy to use and can take a high polish when sanding. Once everything had dried and I had secured the lower hull to the wood by a series of screws along the centerline keel, I then proceeded to use belt sanders to abrade away the lower plastic hull except for an eventually much narrower strip along the keel, constantly adding green modeling putty and hand-sanding to assure a relatively smooth transition from plastic to poplar to putty. I was helped by cutting out a keel template copied from the 1:350 diagram in AJ Press' Yorktown/Enterprise/Hornet publication (by Andrzej Perepeczko), though I chose not to narrow the keel as much as I could have since I felt that this would only accentuate the shortcomings of the remainder of the hull, which would have required a major effort to accurately depict. At least this way, I achieved the narrow cutwater, bottom bow bulge and flared forward hull that I wanted. Once it's finished, I'll post complete photos of the model on ModelWarships.com.

[JTninja]

Nice improvement!

[John W.]

John, I'm hopefully about to make your job easy. First, she was completed with far fewer hull portholes that CV5 or CV6, so don't go by Yorktown plans as they have many many more portholes. There was only a row along the deck just below the hangar deck, and along the foc'sle above hangar level. All of Hornet's portholes below hangar deck level, save a few amidships, were covered with plates and welded closed before she sailed for the war zone. The remaining ones below hangar deck level were covered over in her July 1942 availability at PHNY, after it was noted how far Yorktown listed and still stayed afloat. (I believe that Yorktown and Enterprise also had this done, in stages, as well. Part of wartime preparations to improve watertight integrity). As for portholes themselves, I think a somewhat glossy charcoal gray color works best if open (I'm thinking a sharp lead pencil works well here better than paint), if closed, the color of the surrounding camo. The windows were swung in and metal plates then swung out to close the opening. They were not glass exposed on the exterior when closed.


Here you can see the abbreviated row of portholes initially left in place, mostly amidships, below hangar level in early 1942. Also note the island portholes, some open, some closed. The closed ones show only the metal porthole covers in matching camo color to surrounding area, and they have a star like frame work of stiffeners on them:

Mike -
Thanks - as usual. I am using the Maryland Silver HORNET plans which show clearly the reduced number of portholes on the as-built HORNET. The photos of HORNET in the drydock as she is being finished clearly show the welded-in flush metal plates used to plug the p/h holes in the shell plating. Obviously the CV5 plans were used for the hull plates and plugs were welded in later to remove the offending holes leaving the reduced number in the single row under the hangar deck as you note..
I'm pretty sure that the p/h shown in the hull below the hangar deck level in those plans remained uncovered (with externally welded-on plates that is) until July as you state. Tell me if I'm wrong as I'm proceeding on that assumption for the Doolittle Raid HORNET. I also note that all the photos I've seen of those p/h show almost no 'eyebrow' above the p/h. It appears there is a 1/3 circle of metal 'brow' welded to the actual p/h outer ring itself. since it is so hard to see, I intend not to bother with it when I attach p/h to the hull. I know of no P/E that has the 'brow' as an integral part of the p/h outer ring - all have the brow several (scale) inches above the outer ring. Likewise, I do not intend to try to duplicate the reinforcements on the outside of the p/h cover (which is still inside the window glass anyway). You can call me a wuss or short ball hitter if you wish, but that's my plan.
John