Calling all Benson-class & Gleaves-class DD fans

[drdoom1337]

You know, considering the amount of modifications that would have to be made to represent almost any of the Gleaves class I'd want to build, I might as well go ahead an build an Italian vessel.

[Rick E Davis]

Which GLEAVES class units are you interested in building? Also, in which scale.

[drdoom1337]

Kearny, Edison, Woosley, Ingraham, and Aviere are all of interest to me. Particularly Aviere.

[Rick E Davis]

Well AVIERE in Italian configuration would require modifying her to the Anti-Kamikaze mod. None of the DML kits have that version yet ... not at least yet. Some scratch building required and acquiring two quad 40-mm mounts. Maybe starting with the 1945 BENSON kit and using the GLEAVES stacks.

The others will depend on the time frame you wish to model them. For mid-1942 until 1943, the LIVERMORE 1942 kit would work for all four.

[drdoom1337]

Technically speaking, isn't the 1945 Buchanan somewhat of a Kamikaze fit. I mean, the radars are different, and the aft platform for the 40's would need to be enlarged, but everything else is there. Nothing the GMM PE set and some plastic card can't fix. Plus the round stacks are already included.

[Rick E Davis]

The beauty of the 1945 BENSON kit is that it has nearly all the parts for any of the 1942-1945 BENSON-GLEAVES kits, including GLEAVES class stacks.

The only problem with the 1945 BUCHANAN (1/350 scale kit) is that it is a limited run kit. If you have one of the 1945 BUCHANAN kits or can get it, yes it would work as a start for AVIERE. I just didn't want to steer you to an Out-of-Production kit.

[drdoom1337]

Of the two, which would you think is better? I believe the Benson kit includes more options, but the aft structres are a bit different. I believe the 40mm platforms are widended on Aviere.

[Rick E Davis]

The AVIERE (NICHOLSON) in her anti-kamikaze mod had larger "tubs" on the aft deckhouse for two quad 40-mm mounts. Those don't show up in any of the DML BENSON-GLEAVES kits and need to be scratch-built. The two twin 40-mm "tubs" if carefully removed from either the 1945 BUCHANAN or 1945 BENSON kit, can be relocated to the area between the stacks for the two twin 40-mm mounts located there.

The 1945 BUCHANAN kit shows the standard armament for 1943-45 "Repeat-GLEAVES" class destroyers before the anti-kamikaze program ... four 5-in, two twin 40-mm mounts, seven 20-mm guns (includes the elevated tub before the bridge and two in the bridge wings) and five torpedo tubes. The 1945 BENSON kit shows the standard armament for the original BENSON (and early GLEAVES class before DD-444) class in 1943-45 before the anti-kamikaze program ... four 5-in, two twin 40-mm mounts, FOUR 20-mm guns and TEN torpedo tubes. Either configuration used the Mk 4 (some units got a Mk 22 radar added to the Mk 4 ... not Mk 12 radar) until the Mk 25 radar was available in very late 1944. The 1945 BENSON kit has this radar, the 1945 BUCHANAN kit doesn't.

The one thing on AVIERE that was a mod from her USN configuration, is that they removed the half-shield from the 53 mount. So you can either look for one of these in a DML BENSON-GLEAVES kit (I know they are in the 1940 BENSON kit, not sure about the 1945 BENSON kit ... I'm on the road so I can't look in the kits) or more likely find a nice 5-in/38-cal open mount after-market.

[Javlin]

Well guys I am working on the the Livermore and the PE instructions seem to show a later outfitting maybe.They only show one set of tubes between the stacks not the two as suggested by the kit instructions.I see that no railing goes around the tubes makes sense but does the walkway still exist between the last deckhouse and the one preceding?If so I am sure railing?Last deckhouse railing up to the 5"? Sorry to bother if it's been answered but looked through about the first 10pages and did a search on DD429 but no pics popped up.Thanks in advance.Cheers Kevin

[Rick E Davis]

First off I assume you are modeling the 1942 version of LIVERMORE.

I don't have a good view of LIVERMORE during the middle of 1942 showing detail in the area you are talking about. But, I have a nice view showing her after the addition of twin 40-mm mounts in June 1943. Ignoring the twin 40-mm mounts, the rest of the arrangement didn't change much. The "railing" around on the 01 deck level really wasn't the same as the railing around the deck edge. It was stanchions and lines/chains that could be lowered for action stations. The walkway between the midships deckhouse and the aft deckhouse can just be made out behind the floating net "basket".

[Javlin]

Thanks Rick I think that will cover it for the most part I will assume that the plank between the two deckhouses is lined with railing for safety reasons

[Michael Potter]

I'm considering converting the 1/700 Livermore-Monssen Dragon kit to USS Hambleton (DMS 20) in 1944, on the assumption that photos of DMS 19 and DMS 21 in camouflage measure 32 22D are valid for DMS 20, too.

Has anyone aerial photos showing the the decks of any Benson/Gleaves ship in this camo pattern? This plan could be accurate for the decks but the sides of the actual ships do not match it: http://www.shipcamouflage.com/DesignShe ... DD-421.jpg

Some of the minesweeping equipment can come from Seals's RN River-class frigate 1/700 kit. Other items will need scratchbuilding and the photoetch kit from MicroMark.

I've studied the naturally useful posts here from Rick Davis and Jim Russell. BZ to correspondents for the information and pictures here.

[Rick E Davis]

Here is a photo I have of HAMBLETON (DMS-20), I have no idea of what dazzle scheme it is.

As for the camo pattern on the deck, I don't know. The "in yard" photos I have of HAMBLETON show the decks to only be painted in standard Deck Blue. I have noticed on other BENSON-GLEAVES class units as destroyers and as converted to DMS painted in dazzle camo, that the decks didn't carry the dazzle scheme on the deck. I don't know if this was standard practice or that the pattern was applied as the last thing prior to departure from the yard.

[Michael Potter]

Thanks for these great photos. If you have other detailed photos of DMS's, I'm sure they will interest many modelers, me among them.

The camouflage generally fits measure 31-32-33 pattern 22d, except it is apparently simplified to two vertical shades and one deck shade. The contrast of the white pennant number on the hull suggests that the vertical lighter shade is light gray (measure 32) or haze gray (measure 31).

Repainting the decks at the end of the yard period would be awkward since the crew would be embarked by then and the painted areas would have to be closed to foot traffic while the paint dried. Based on your post here, single-shade horizontal surfaces seem in order.

[Rick E Davis]

They never painted the entire deck at once. I have come across many photos where some sections of the deck has been given a coat of primer (the ship was in Ms 21 and it is noticable). With all the work going on during yard periods, painting the deck last makes sense.

In any case, I think they didn't paint the dazzle schemes over the decks in the Atlantic Fleet (all the DMS conversions were done on the East Coast). The dazzzle camo was more a counter to Subs and as such painting the deck made little sense. People don't agree with me, but I never thought that dazzle camo was of much use against aircraft ... except as "HERE I AM".

[Duwayne]

My father served on the Ericsson, DD-440, and I recently painted a picture of it for him. I tried to use all the reference photos I had at the time, but after seeing your site here, I'm wondering if I made a mistake in painting the ship in all gray. Does anyone know if it was painted gray or some sort of camoflage during the war? I served 40 years in the Army as a helicopter pilot, but I don't know a lot about Navy ships, particularly WW2 versions. I would appreciate any help I could get.

[Timmy C]

What year are/did you portray the ship? She changed schemes during the war, from the pre-war grey (a light grey) to the dark grey/light tops of Measure 1 to the Measure 12 modified pattern...and that was just up to 1942! (pics of each on Navsource: http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/440.htm) Likely she took on either MS 21 or MS 22 by war's end.

[Rick E Davis]

USS ERICSSON (DD-440) served most of the war in the Atlantic. After the various camo measures used in 1941 into early 1942 that Timmy pointed out, ship was painted in Ms 22 from late 1942 through mid 1944. I don't have any photos of her in dazzle, but she likely was in a dazzle camo for a time in late 1944 until reverting to Ms 22 in about March-April 1945. In about July-August 1945 ERICSSON transferred to the Pacific after being modified to the Anti-Kamikaze mod (no Torpedo Tubes, two quad 40-mm, and two twin 40-mm mounts) at Boston Navy Yard. I don't know if she was painted in Ms 21 (solid 5N) or in Ms 22 (two-tone) in 1945. ERICSSON was in DesDiv 21 with USS LIVERMORE (DD-429), USS ERBELE (DD-430), and USS KEARNY (DD-432). Photos of LIVERMORE in December 1944 shows her painted in a dazzle scheme. Photos of ERBELE in June 1945 after her upgrade to the Anti-Kamikaze mod shows her in Ms 21. Practice at the time was that all the units in the same DesDiv were painted in the same camo scheme, if dazzle the pattern may be different between ships however.

Anyway, it all depends on what timeframe your father served on USS ERICSSON as to which scheme to show her in to be accurate. If your father served several years onboard the same ship, likely he saw several "paint" jobs.

This is the latest dated image of ERICSSON I have:



A June 1945 view of ERBELE in Ms 21 and the Anti-Kamikaze mod.

[Michael Potter]

In the Dragon 1/700 kits, rivet counters should correct panel 1 of the instruction sheet:

• The TT director is part D31, not D9.
  
  The lookout posts are part D34, not D31.
  
  I think the 24-inch searchlights belong on the 02-level (part C6 or C14), not on the 03-level (part C5 or C24), for at least some of the class. In any case, the starboard platform is obviously D32, not D34.

What do tiny parts F-2, F-3, and S-8 represent?

[Timmy C]

F-2 and F-3 are for the twin 40mm mount.

S-8...I think it's an optional bottom for the Mk. 37 in case you want to drill a hole in the base and have the director facing a direction other than straight ahead. The way the kit is molded, the conning tower top is molded as the base of the director, so the latter can only face forward.