Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[Tracy White]

The catwalks are one of the big disappointments in the kit to me; there were doors, half-stairways down and up, all sorts of extra details that were left off of the kit. Some of the doors were open air archways without a door; they just lead to another catwalk to the side of the hangar bay structure and there was no reason to "pay" the cost in weight to have a door. In terms off adding this detail... might be a little late for this build unless you want to do a lot of work or buy an expensive set. I think it's easier to cut the sides off and scratch build them than to evenly drill and thin out, etc.

[Rdutnell]

It sounds like Trumpeter blew it with the flight deck a bit. The tabs are bad and the sides are wrong. I'm sure it was a money decision somewhere along the line, even though I don't see that it would cost more to do it right. If you're going to do it...

I've been wondering how Chris Toops put thise open doors on his very nicely done Essex. I wonder if he did what you said and cut the sides off. Closed doors they will be.

[Tracy White]

Well, keep in mind what we had at the time; this was their follow-on release to the CV-8 Hornet kit, which was the first real plastic carrier in 1/350th. The Essexes were a good step up from that, and they are entirely buildable. We've just entered an age of higher fidelity and expectations.

[Rdutnell]

Ahhhh yes. Very buildable and fun to build. The goood news is that I'm sure the higher expectations will prompt (and are prompting) better models. People like you who are knowledgeable both about ships and the art of modeling developing relationsips with the companies that make models and their distributors is a win-win deal. This site let's them know what their customers want and if they want to survive, they must, and will adapt.

CHEERS!!!

[Rdutnell]

I always wondered how and the heck they manged 100+ planes in such a confined area, especially after seeing the 32 planes I have so far on the decks. This pic shows how they managed it. Pretty cool!

deckplan.jpg (17.08 KiB) Viewed 1402 times

[Russ2146]

Yes, and they still do it this way. There are two deck layouts one for the flight deck and one for the hangar deck. It might explain those odd numbers that first appeared on the cowls of aircraft during WW2.

[Hippy Ed]

I always wondered how and the heck they manged 100+ planes in such a confined area, especially after seeing the 32 planes I have so far on the decks. This pic shows how they managed it. Pretty cool!

deckplan.jpg

Yep. They still have the Ouiji board today.

[Rdutnell]

Interesting. I'm surprised that it's not computerized these days.

[Hippy Ed]

Interesting. I'm surprised that it's not computerized these days.

Well, they say "to err is human but, to really foul things up requires the aid of a computer Don't want to mess up a good thing...

[ShangHist]

Interesting. I'm surprised that it's not computerized these days.

An attempt was made to computerize Flight Deck Control and Hangar Deck Control but because aircraft position and status changes so quickly, it is more efficient to retain the silhouette system. It was found that it takes longer to find a specific aircraft in the system, enter its position when it is parked, then have to go back and update fuel status, weapons status, and mechanical condition. There is also no need to retain the data once the aircraft is launched for the next evolution. The old grease pencil, scrub rag, and colored hex nuts still do the job well.

[Rdutnell]

That still surprises me. It would seem that they could put some sort of locator on the planes, using, I don't know, short distance radio triangulation or something like that to update in real time.

[Russ2146]

You mean like an RFI chip or somethimg like they use on long-haul trucks to give locations. But then you'd need sensors all over the place to pick up the signals and with the number of electronic signals inherent to an aircraft carrier already, that might be a problem. In addition, those info transmitters would have to turn off once the aircraft left the ship, lest they become a homing signal for a missile.

[Cliffy B]

A wise person once said, "Don't fix what isn't broken." Few seem to abide by that anymore.

When they brought back the BBs in the 1980's they were going to rip out he antiquated 1940's analog fire control computer for the 16" guns and put in a new state of the art fancy dancy digital system until they found that the original one outperformed the digital one.

If it still works and does the job efficiently and safely then why change it? Everyone thinks that adding technology and/or going digital is always the best way to do things but its certainly is not always the case. What happens when the power goes out for instance? Anyone know to do anything the old fashioned way anymore? We're so friggin dependent on technology its frightening. Not everything needs to be computerized people.

[Rdutnell]

"Not everything needs to be computerized people."
I couldn't agree more, I'm just surprised taht they haven't "up" graded.
That's cool that the analog fire controllers worked better than digital.
So, I guess it's like you essentially said, "if it's not broke, don't fix it."

[Tracy White]

Have you heard the bit about how NASA spent a lot of money to develop a pen that could write in zero gravity, while the Russians just used pencil? Now, to be truthful, there were fears that the graphite in pencils could cause electrical shorts, but the basic premise is sound - sometimes the simplest solution is the best. I preach this with my clients - what is the VALUE, how will this IMPROVE things? If you can't answer that in definite terms, it ain't worth it.

Unless, of course, it's "the boss wants it."

[keithhufnagel]

As to 'landing lights' on Essex ships. . . I used the photos on pg. 22 of Glenn Arnold's Warship Perspective (on Essex ships) of Franklin, I believe. They (the deck edge lights)seemed pretty obvious to me and so I estimated the distance and added them mirrored both sides on my USS Yorktown CV-10. They look like two angle brackets with a square plate on top, crowned with a cylinder. I also noticed them on other 'battle damage' photos of various ships. The more I looked the more they showed up. I think you can see them on my Yorktown Gallery photos as to my construction. As to the lights in the deck I believe they were under glass and could only be seen from above. . . but that's what an 'old sailor' told me. Cannot confirm though. Hope this helps!

[Hippy Ed]

The old adage comes to mind... "To err is human but, to really foul things up requires the aid of a computer..."

[Dick J]

That still surprises me. It would seem that they could put some sort of locator on the planes, using, I don't know, short distance radio triangulation or something like that to update in real time.

I used to fly electronic warfare aircraft for the USN. Periodically, the CV's would have us test their emcon status. They usually failed. The ship already radiates enough unintended signals without adding more. Even with your proposal, the ship would have to have the "old way" available, if only for when the locators were turned off during an attempted emcon exercise.

[Rdutnell]

Yeah, I thought about the signal such a system would give off after I posted it. I guess the Ouiji board is the best deal or they would have switched. Thanks for the input. I now know what emcon is.

[Rdutnell]

Cat walk question...

Who has the best cat walks for sale? I notice on Essex class carriers that there is a catwalk on the starboard side between the hanger deck and flight deck levels. The GMM kits I have don't include that, so I'm trying to find a good source, because I would hate to use plastic with all the others being PE.