Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[Hippy Ed]

I will say that we had family visiting and camping out in the room where all my reference books and computer with research are kept.

That said, I also have a thumb drive of notes I keep with me that I didn't reference either, so mea culpa.

As far as the differences go... I think it's cool in a way. A bit of a PITA for some, but it also means that you have options and variations.

That yer story & yer stickin' to it right?!
family have a way of interfering with our research don't they...

[Tracy White]

Well, it did get me out to the garage quite a bit... which is where I model

[Hippy Ed]

Well, it did get me out to the garage quite a bit... which is where I model

Awesome!!!

[Rdutnell]

Oh man,

I just got this book, and it is incredible!

[Rdutnell]

In my opinion Franklin kit is a better starting point. The main problem will be stern sponson. Both Yorktown and Franklin have sponsons with two 40 mm quads and you will need sponson with single 40 mm quad. But it should not be hard to scratchbuild.

You may need these PE parts.



Thank you
Kim

I apologize for bombarding everyone with a bazillion questions but I'm trying to learn as much as I can so my model can be as close to reality as possible.

I'm building (or trying to build) the Bennington in late June 1945 (after the typhoon, but before She returned to Leyte for repairs. I'm using the Trumpeter 1/350 Essex, but as many of you know, that I did not when I got the idea to build this model, was that there are a LOT of differences between the ships, and even between a given ship over the years. For a neophye modeler, it is almost overwhelming, because as I said in another post, I seem to learn things after I need to know them.

My current issue is with the Quad 40mm Gun mounts on the bow and stern. The model kit has one at both locations but Bennington had two. It seems to me that the PE shown is my solution, but how difficult would it be to do it right? I haven't attached the single bow mount yet, but I have attached the stern mount (as can be seen in the attached figure). FYI... I have done zip,zero, nada scratch building. Also, can you buy just the mounts shown? I only saw them as part of a huge kit that I may have bought when I started, but I can't now. If you can buy them, where?

[Dick J]

The Essex class can be divided into two groups: Long-hull and Short-hull. The original design was modified to incorporate more AA positions, including two quad 40MM each on the bow and the stern. The two on the bow required more space, and the bow was widened and extended forward, hence the "long-hull" designator. Once this change was made, all ships started after that point were changed to the new design. Ships whose "short-bow" was too advanced to change completed as short-hulls, and none of these were changed to long-hulls during the war. However, even the short-hulls could modify the stern sponson to take two quads aft, which most eventually did. There were a few other changes as well, one of which was to eliminate the hangar level catapult in favor of a second flightdeck unit. Ships built after this decision lacked the large opening in the port side of the hangar right aft of the forward 5" gun gallery. All long-hulls and the short-hulled Bennington and Bon Homme Richard had this change. Also, as the number of quad 40MM increased, the need for the two port side quads, associated with the 5" galleries, to fire "cross-deck" was eliminated and the guns were lowered to the level of the 5" mounts. This also eliminated the associated notches in the flightdeck. Bennington was built with this difference. In fact, except for the shorter bow with the single quad mount, Bennington had more in common with the long-hulls (as built) than most of her short-hulled sisters. (CV's 20 and 31 actually commissioned after the commissioning of the first long-hulls.)

[Tracy White]

For a neophye modeler, it is almost overwhelming, because as I said in another post, I seem to learn things after I need to know them.

About 8 years ago I got the Trumpeter Franklin. Didn't know which ship I wanted to do, etc., didn't know a lot about them, but then I found out that a local facility had the records of her overhaul following the kamikaze hit in October 1944. Found some photos, sat down with the kit, and started comparing to the photos. Stopped before I got to the island and had over 80 corrections/improvements listed (and some of them were groups like "all guns need....."). It lead to a lot more research and study, and the notion of producing a book for modelers along the lines of "if you want to do AA ship in BB year in CC scale, start with DD kit and make EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE changes.

Well, that was about 7.5 years ago and the damned things still in progress. So I won't lie, don't hold your breath (I hope to finish the research this fall though - w00t!). But, that said, if you ask a question, between the other experts and I, we can probably answer it. I decided a while ago that I wasn't going to just post the lists of changes so that there's still interest in the book when I get it out, but that I also didn't want to hurt someone's build by sitting on information that could help. These next few days and nights are not good for my free time, but if you ask, I'll try and answer as quickly as I can (plus, I've had to answer less and less because we've got some other experts out there who've taken notes about what I've found and posted).

I guess I'm mainly lamenting that I haven't got "the book" done yet...

Also, I'm not trying to imply I'm the only one who can answer your questions. Dick knows gobs. There are others who can speak to a specific ship very well.

[Rdutnell]

I can see that happening, this is a fascinating subject and it's easy to get absorbed in it. My experience is similar to yours. I thought this build would be a little more detailed and challenging than the Missouri/England diorama, but after looking at pictures I came to realize, like you, that there are a LOT of differences between the ships.

Just as a quick example, look at the following 2 images. The first is a copy of the plans in the Trumpeter kit, the 2nd is from SteelNavy with the gun mounts I have to add, 10 of those bad boys.

So I have stopped construction, a little later than you, because I have started on the island (see attached), and have ordered some books. I promise I won't write one.

The books I've ordered include Raven's "Essex Class Carriers", Arnold's "Warship Perspectives: Essex Class Aircraft Carriers in World War Two", and "Aircraft Carrier USS Bennington" (Author unknown) from CIB Media. I'm also considering getting the Essex Class DVD at:
http://www.stillmotionsphotographics.co ... earchTerm=
Does any body know anything about it?
As for your book Tracy, you'll get there, and I'll bet you will be proud when you do. I wonder what questions, and adventures seeking the answers, will follow?

CHEERS!

[Rdutnell]

I just keep getting more confused. Here's a picture of Bennington I found somewhere, in the dazzle, with one bow mount. And in the typhoon damage pic, that started this adventure, it looks like it has only one mount, though it's hard to tell since it's smashed. And I don't see the side gun mounts.

[Tracy White]

Bennington was a short hull - only a single quad mount on the bow.

[Tracy White]

I'm also considering getting the Essex Class DVD at:
http://www.stillmotionsphotographics.co ... earchTerm=
Does any body know anything about it?
As for your book Tracy, you'll get there, and I'll bet you will be proud when you do. I wonder what questions, and adventures seeking the answers, will follow?

In order.... I've worked with Ray, but haven't purchased the disc mainly because for the most part I already have a lot of photos and knowledge of the ships and it just didn't occur to me that there might be much I could learn from it, being that I'm in the archives scanning high-resolution files every month. In retrospect this is a little snobbish and I'll order one when I can.

With regards to books and adventures; I've already got a list of them. I've been studying camouflage for a number of years as well and working through a bunch of mysteries that we have. There's a big controversy over the color of the battleships at Pearl Harbor I'm trying to solve. Each trip to the archives is a balancing act of choosing which subjects have the greatest need - right now I need to at least feed the Essex class, camouflage, and my web site's need for fun & interesting documents. In the past I also had research for manufacturers like Dragon. It's too bad it's such a niche, because I'd like to do more of it.....

[Cliffy B]

Hey guys, I'm finally delving into my whiffed version of Leyte using the Dragon Antietam kit as a basis and I have a question about the bow on the kit versus drawings; which is correct?! The kit squares off the deck and resembles a perfect "arc" from the waterline to the bull nose. All of the drawings I've seen, including Raven and Roberts book and the USN General Booklet of Plans, show an arc starting from the waterline that rises about halfway up and then reverses direction for the upper half creating a bulge that I assume was added to support the bow gun tubs.

Speaking of the gun tubs, did all long hulls have circular gun tubs or were some different? The kit has what look like rectangles with rounded corners instead. From all of the photos I've seen the tubs should be circular with small horizontal piece connecting them near the edge of the bow and their sides flaring out to match the edge of the deck.

I know I'm whiffing this but I don't want the bow to be messed up as I'm leaving it open as a prominent feature. I'd like to fix it if need be early rather than later. Any and all help is appreciated as always.

-Mike

[Brian J.]

Speaking of the gun tubs, did all long hulls have circular gun tubs or were some different? The kit has what look like rectangles with rounded corners instead. From all of the photos I've seen the tubs should be circular with small horizontal piece connecting them near the edge of the bow and their sides flaring out to match the edge of the deck.

I know I'm whiffing this but I don't want the bow to be messed up as I'm leaving it open as a prominent feature. I'd like to fix it if need be early rather than later. Any and all help is appreciated as always.

-Mike

I hate those tubs!! They should be corrected to reflect the circular tubs that the ships actually had.

[Rdutnell]

So I found two pix that complicate the issue.

The first is a great shot of Bennington's bow. (Source: Somewhere on the Net?) It clearly shows one bow mount and no side mounts. I don't know the date but she's not in dazzle so it isn't from the time I'm interested in.

The second is from August, 1953, that I found on the USS-BENNINGTON.ORG site. It is interesting for many reasons. First, this is the cruise my dad was on as a Midshipmen. He doesn't remember the "Operation Pinwheel" manuever, and as cool as that would be to see, they may have been on Liberty. In any case, there are clearly 2 bow mounts and the side mounts are clearly visible.

The question is, when did these modifications take place? The SteelNavy site says "August 1944 - November 1946" which narrows the window, but still is not much help.

[Rdutnell]

OK..., obviously the 2nd photo is CVA-20 after modifications, but the issue remains the same.

[Tracy White]

The first is a great shot of Bennington's bow. (Source: Somewhere on the Net?) It clearly shows one bow mount and no side mounts. I don't know the date but she's not in dazzle so it isn't from the time I'm interested in.

bennington-5-a.jpg

You found it! That's the photo I mentioned that shows the cut back forward flight deck after the typhoon.

The question is, when did these modifications take place? The SteelNavy site says "August 1944 - November 1946" which narrows the window, but still is not much help.

I'm not sure of you ever use the "Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships," but it's a relatively short and sometimes colorful (sometimes maddingly obtuse) history of most of the ships of the USN. It provides a fairly good quick fact-check history to get a rough feel for things. There are multiple copies online, from Official Navy sites to asbestosis ambulance chasers.

http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/r2/randolph-ii.htm

If you read through that, there's no mention that she hit the states at all in 1945 before the war ended, so we know that she did not have the twin mounts up front during the war. She looks fairly busy following the war doing magic carpet, and I doubt they would take the time to add more AA guns when she was needed to get cranky service members home. In 1946 she was used as a training ship... could have happened then, but I tend to think they'd put a reserves training ship on a lower priority for upgrades. However, DANFS notes that she was mothballed in 1948 and then re-activated in 1953, about when that photo was taken. My bet was that she was updated at the time she was mothballed or re-activated.

[Brian J.]

So I found two pix that complicate the issue.

The first is a great shot of Bennington's bow. (Source: Somewhere on the Net?) It clearly shows one bow mount and no side mounts. I don't know the date but she's not in dazzle so it isn't from the time I'm interested in.

bennington-5-a.jpg

The second is from August, 1953, that I found on the USS-BENNINGTON.ORG site. It is interesting for many reasons. First, this is the cruise my dad was on as a Midshipmen. He doesn't remember the "Operation Pinwheel" manuever, and as cool as that would be to see, they may have been on Liberty. In any case, there are clearly 2 bow mounts and the side mounts are clearly visible.

ussbennington_miniposter.jpg

The question is, when did these modifications take place? The SteelNavy site says "August 1944 - November 1946" which narrows the window, but still is not much help.

Bennington's SCB-27A started in December 1950 and completed in November 1952 in New York. I don't believe any of the short hull ships received the second bow mount until their SCB-27 refit. Hope this helps.

[Dick J]

As I indicated in my previous post, none of the short hulls had their bows modified during the war. However, it was a part of the SCB-27 axial-deck programs. CV's 9, 10, 11, 12, 18, and 20 were all converted to the "long-hull" bow during modernization. CV's 16 and 31 received the enclosed bow as part of their SCB-27C/125 simultaneous upgrade. CV's 13 and 17 were unmodified in any way. When the SCB-27 ships later received the SCB-125 upgrade, the extended bow was actually cut back a bit as part of the enclosing of the bow. (A probable result of the damage CV-14 received rounding the horn after her SCB-27C modernization.)

[Rdutnell]

Well, all this is good news. That means I don't have to modify the bow mount.

I'm guessing the side mounts and extra stern mount would have been installed at the same time as the bow mount, which means it looks like I'm good to go as far as gun mounts are concerned.

Still, I think I will wait until my books get here before I do much more building. I'll be out of town next week, so I hopefully me books will be waiting for me when I get home.

Thanks again for your help!!!

[Cliffy B]

Since this got buried I'll ask again.

Hey guys, I'm finally delving into my whiffed version of Leyte using the Dragon Antietam kit as a basis and I have a question about the bow on the kit versus drawings; which is correct?! The kit squares off the deck and resembles a perfect "arc" from the waterline to the bull nose. All of the drawings I've seen, including Raven and Roberts book and the USN General Booklet of Plans, show an arc starting from the waterline that rises about halfway up and then reverses direction for the upper half creating a bulge that I assume was added to support the bow gun tubs.

Speaking of the gun tubs, did all long hulls have circular gun tubs or were some different? The kit has what look like rectangles with rounded corners instead. From all of the photos I've seen the tubs should be circular with small horizontal piece connecting them near the edge of the bow and their sides flaring out to match the edge of the deck.

I know I'm whiffing this but I don't want the bow to be messed up as I'm leaving it open as a prominent feature. I'd like to fix it if need be early rather than later. Any and all help is appreciated as always.

Gun tubs are cleared up but I still need to know about the bow shape. Anyone?