The Ship Model Forum

Sebastian,

I don't recall seeing twin 20mm on any of the Clevelands during the war, but I could be wrong. Check back through this thread - I think I recall some posts about this a year or two back.

Phil

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

I was totally overjoyed to find this site today !!! 10/15/2013

EGAD , I can't believe I lived within driving distance of the last surviving Cleveland class cruiser ( the Little Rock) and never knew about it.
I've since moved to Florida upon retiring and "restarted" ship modeling. I endeavor to build a model of my Father's ship the Light Cruiser Houston CL 81 and up til now , was tearing my hair out trying to find accurate info on this ship. I found a few sources but who can afford $100 for a book to build a model or $200 for the blueprints? My library has almost nothing on the subject. All my Dad said was that he was on the Houston and mentioned several battles he was in. by clever deductive reasoning I found out that it was actually the CL 81.

I then searched for at least a model that was close and found a Lindberg 1/600 scale of the Manchester CL 83, and figured that was close enough.
NOOOOOT ! first off the Lindberg model is junk and terrbly inaccurate. I attempted to rebuild, from sheet plastic ,the whole bridge structure but in the process, I found that the hull was wrong as well. I give up on this kit. Then I looked for a YMW CL 55 or CL 89, but NOOOOO, they are out of business. Thank Goodness I found "Iron Shipwrights" model CL 89 in 1/350. They stated that they bought and reworked the dies from YMW. Now I hafta come up with the $ for this kit, but I think in honor of my Father,it's worth it. I found this site today and appreciate the info contained within. After 2 years research off and on , I finally am underway. TYTYTYTYTY

There are also the all-inclusive 1/700 kits released by Blue Ridge, though the plastic is from an older kit:
CL-89: http://www.freetimehobbies.com/1-700-bl ... model-kit/
CL-55: http://www.freetimehobbies.com/1-700-bl ... model-kit/

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Jay,

For the history of the Cleveland class, and some information about the different variations between ships in this class, see:

http://www.okieboat.com/Cleveland%20Cla ... story.html

For plans for later ships like the Houston see:

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/plans/index.htm

and get the Booklet of General Plans for the USS Miami CL-89.

For some really excellent pictures of this class ship, see the "Mighty Ninety" page for the USS Astoria CL-90:

http://www.mighty90.com/

Phil

PS: When was your dad on the Houston? I have a good friend who served on the ship in 1945 and 1946.

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

TY for repling to my post guys, any and all info is much welcomed and appreciated.
My father John Jerisek was on the Cl 81 Houston up until 1944 when she first got torpedoed and towed to the atoll Ulithe for temporary repairs.

Jay,

The Houston was torpedoed twice in two days, and managed to stay afloat. That was quite an achievement. Here is the Navy's report on the damage and repairs:

http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/ ... epair.html

None of the Clevelands were sunk during WWII, but several sustained significant damage. The Houston suffered the greatest damage, but not the greatest losses (USS Birmingham) of the class.

Phil

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

Hello all,

While most of Midship model kits are resin, are some of them are also plastic? Blue Ridge models, who seem to occupy Midship models' website nowadays, has some plastic kits.

I just wanted to clarify whether the kit below for the Cleveland class USS Miami is resin or not. It does not say at the ad.

Ebay ad: Midship Models, USS Miami, 1/700

I'm also somewhat wary of whether this is a real ad considering how cheap it's been bid so far.

Thanks in advance.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill

Yes, some Midship kits are plastic. The Cleveland class is one of them, because they are actually the old Pit-Road/Skywave kits. In this particular kit, there are no add-ons like PE like there are in the new Blue Ridge versions of the kit.

You can see a video review of the Miami kit here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgIoVYIkv0w

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Thanks Timmy for that video link.

Still, I just want to clarify one of the basic differences between earlier and later Cleveland class members...

Upon looking through the class' wiki articles, it seems to me that CL-55 (Cleveland) thru CL63 (Mobile) had rounded bridge superstructures, while CL64 (Vincennes) onwards had square ones. The pennant number list of course leaves out those converted to Independence class CVLs.

Were those earlier class members later converted to square bridges? The wiki article doesn't say.

Seems I made a mistake in ordering Skywave's USS Miami kit (from Ebay) with an intention to model one of her earlier sisters, only to overlook the basic differences between her and her earlier sisters. Perhaps it's a good thing I didn't buy multiple copies of the same kit. Perhaps I should have instead bought multiple copies of Skywave's USS Cleveland kit.

Still, "square-bridge" class members with notable war records include the USS Miami, USS Vincennes II, USS Biloxi, USS Astoria II and USS Houston II. (*II- being the 2nd cruiser in that war to have that name.)

edited to add: It seems USS Cleveland's own bridge was also unique among the earlier Clevelands, since it had a square top above its rounded bridge while the other earlier class members had a larger rounded bridge without a square top.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill

Pay close attention to the shipping on the ad, it's upward of $31.

You are correct in that CL-55 through CL-63 were the round bridge units. None were ever converted to square bridge types. Other identifying features include the 40MM arrangements, which varied over time, and a few ships had some unique configurations.


I am not aware of Cleveland getting a "square top" on her bridge. Could you provide a link to the photo?

Observe and learn, my young Padewan.

From an Ebay ad:


Plus another pic from this other source, in case you don't believe the artist's conception above.

Compare what's above to the other early Cleveland class ships like USS Mobile: (c/of the USN Ship camo website)



Notice the difference? The Mobile has a larger, rounded bridge, while the Cleveland has square level above, with a semi-circle walkway/guntub sticking out, all above a rounded bridge that seems to be smaller.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill

Cleveland was the only ship of her class to go to war with the original design twin 40MM on the upper level of the bridge. The semi-circular projections you see were for the MK-51 directors for those mounts. There was a curved bulkhead between them. Nothing square about it. The other 6 round bridge ships deleted these high twin mountings in favor of quads at the O-2 level, just aft of the forward beam 5" mounts. Late war, some of these other round bridge Clevelands also mounted MK-51's atop the pilothouse, but these were a bit further aft, around the curve. Cleveland had the depicted arrangement from the beginning. As for the pilothouse, it was exactly the same size on all 7 round bridge ships.

I agree with Dick. I have most of the the blueprints for the Clevelands and there was no difference between the basic structure of the round bridge ships CL-55 through CL-63. There were several small differences between CL-55, CL-56 and CL-57, including the director tubs at the top of the pilot house on CL-55.

The square bridge/pilot house modification was done to reduce topside weight. The round pilot house was armored (6" I think, but don't quote me - I need to check the blueprints), putting a massive weight high up. This prevented adding all of the anti-aircraft guns that the Navy wanted to add after the war started. The square bridge/pilot house carried only light armor plating. The reduced weight allowed more guns and directors to be added. None of the round pilot houses were retrofitted to the square pilot house.

There actually were two different square bridge type Clevelands, but the difference isn't noticeable in pictures (or models). All of the early Clevelands had aluminum superstructures. CL-64 and CL-65 also had aluminum superstructures, but the remainder of the ships were steel so aluminum could be used for airplanes. This added to the top-heavy problem that plagued all of the Clevelands.

I think it is safe to say that no two Clevelands were alike. Different shipyards made local modifications that didn't appear on ships built in other yards. As the war progressed changes were made on newer ships. Some changes were retrofitted to earlier ships, but only if they were damaged severely enoough to require a shipyard repair period.

Many (all?) of the Cleveland class models that I have seen have errors out of the box. If you want to modify a kit for ship X to be ship Y you need to do your homework.

Phil

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

Everyone,

Thank you all for your feedback about the differences between earlier and later members of the Cleveland class. All your feedback is greatly appreciated.

I am just being a stickler for minor differences between class members because I am building a diorama of one of TF38's carrier task groups during the Battle of Leyte Gulf, and the availability of kits- and which ones can be modified if I buy multiple copies- determines which one of those groups it will be.

I already ordered Skywave's USS Miami via Ebay. Upon seeing pictures of her sisters USS Vincennes II and USS Biloxi, they seem to have the same bridge, but as DrPR said, there maybe less obvious differences in their square-bridge superstructures. Both the Vincennes and Miami were with Admiral Bogan's TG38.2, while USS Biloxi was with Admiral Davison's 38.4.

While I am still backreading older posts on this 9-page thread, has anyone who's posted in the last week built Skywave's Cleveland kit?

I'm also mulling buying this Cleveland kit via Ebay, but am not sure whether she can be converted to any of her early class sisters since she has a high twin 40mm on a circular level above the bridge. Admiral Sherman's TG38.3 had 3 "early" round-bridge Cleveland class CLs, namely Santa Fe, Mobile and Birmingham.

Still, I asked above if anyone built the kit to find out if the part for the level with the single twin 40mm can be removed to portray other class members, or is it not a separate part from the round bridge in the kit?

Anyways, I will continue doing my research beyond sifting through online sources like navsource or wikipedia. Squadron books' US Light Cruisers in action seems to be the logical place to continue as soon as my book order for it arrives at my local model store.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill

I have multiple kits of the Skywave/Midships Cleveland (and the Miami) for the purpose of making some of the sister ships. I haven't finished any yet (still working out how far I want to go with corrections vs. out-of-box) but I have examined the possibilities. The deck piece that has the bridge 40MM tubs should be relatively easy to modify for both the tubs and the bulwark above the pilothouse. The difficulty is in making the tubs for the 40MM quads behind the forward beam 5" mounts. Cleveland originally had a projection on the O-1 level that held a 20MM gun. Columbia and Montpelier used that as part of the base for a box structure to support the quad. Starting with Denver, all of this was replaced by a 2 level structure that was rounded on the outboard side. This became standard for the remainder of the class. (Careful with a couple of photos on Navsource. The cruiser expert at Navsource is checking them to see if they are miscaptioned. There is one "Columbia" and one "Montpelier" photo that show the rounded 40MM base. Both are actually Denver.) When the second pair of quads were added, they were more between the funnels on the round bridge types. The after beam 5" on the square bridge units were actually further aft than those on the round bridge ships for the express purpose of making room further aft for this second pair of quads. (And the square bridge units lacked the high twin 40MM on the after superstructure, replacing it with a twin at the O-1 level between the quads.) Denver received the new quads at the O-1 level, the only Cleveland to do so. All others had the second pair of quads at the O-2 like the forward pair.

Another thing to watch for is timeframe. Biloxi was the first square bridge ship to complete, and at first lacked the open bridge in front of the pilothouse. She later received it, but operated for a time without. Also, the 40MM and 20MM arrangements changed over time. Later ships completed with more 40MM, and earlier ships later modified to the standard. But some variations remained. The Squadron book is great for pictures, but has some factual data issues. (This is true of many of the earlier Squadron pubs. They have made a great effort of late to correct this, but the older books haven't been revised.) Another small point - don't put the rangefinder pieces on turret 4 on ANY Cleveland. None ever had it, even in the design stage. Even the earlier Brooklyn and St Louis classes lacked the R/F in their turret 5 right from commissioning.

I didn't find the Squadron "Light Cruisers In Action" to be useful. Pretty lightweight stuff. There are errors in the drawings (rangefinders on turret #4 on the Cleveland, a missing SPW/2 antenna on the Little Rock CLG-4). There are a lot of errors in the text. It does have a few good photos, but you can get these from Navsource or the US Navy Historical Center (Naval History and Heritage Command).

As Dick said, no Cleveland class ship had rangefinders on the #4 turret. This has never been a secret. Every photo of the aft part of these ships shows this! Any time you see drawings or models of the Clevelands that show these rangefinders you know whoever created it didn't know much about these ships. It's like putting camel humps on a drawing of an elephant! Pretty stupid!

Your best bet is to collect as many photos of your subject ships as you can. Ask about them here. There have been quite a few posts on this thread describing the differences among the ships of this class.

Another word of caution: the USS Miami CL-89 Booklet of General Plans shows the rangefinders missing from the #1 turret (the plans booklet I have is dated June 4, 1946). They were removed from several of the ships to reduce topside weight. The ship had them 30 January, 1944 (BS #60609). They had been removed by 18 July, 1945 (BS #87459). This is typical of the Cleveland class ships - they changed a lot over time. You will need to pick a date for the ships you want to model and find photos/plans for that period.

Phil

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle

Dick, since you have the actual unassembled kits, do you have pics of the spruce that has part in question that I've encircled in the Skywave box art pic below? I am just wondering if this bulwark part is separate or part of the pilothouse immediately below it.

Just to clear up confusion, encircled in orange circle below is the part I've been referring to in previous posts, which seems unique to Cleveland among the early round-bridge members of her class. I am just wondering if the absence of this part on the Cleveland kit would allow an easier conversion of any class member from CL56 to CL63.



And now look at USS Mobile, another early round-bridge class member.

_________________
"Haijun" means "navy" in Mandarin Chinese.

"You have enemies? Good. It means you stood up for something in your life."- Winston Churchill

CCGSailor the bulkward of the kit is seperate. I have built several of these kits of both bridges. I find the Skywave kit to be better. The instructions are much more clear and actually lets you know where the pieces go. The midship instructions are awful and only give one side of the ship as ref for painting. Plus the skywave kits are the original and are most likely better due to they are first hand molds. Hope this helps.

_________________
On the Bench
1/350 Independence
1/350 Dunkerque
1/350 Shimakaze
1/350 Sharnhorst Dragon
1/350 Belfast

CCGSailor,

A major difference between the Cleveland/Columbia and other ships of the class is in the area between the smoke pipes (funnels). The models I have seen of the Cleveland are as commissioned - with two boat cranes, a bunch of boats and a 20mm "gallery" midships.

The boat farms were a tremendous fire hazard - several "treaty" cruisers were lost in part because fires in the boats and their fuel prevented coordinated fore-aft damage control. Shortly after the war started the boats were removed. First one boat crane was removed but subsequent ships had neither the boats nor the cranes amidships. The 20mm batteries were changed several times before they were replaced with dual 40mm guns port/starboard.

The boat farm was replaced with motor whaleboats in davits port/starboard in the vicinity of the aft smoke pipe.

You will need to reconstruct the midships area.

Phil

_________________
A collision at sea will ruin your entire day. Aristotle