Calling all Iowa-class (BB-61) fans

[OS1880]

Hank saw them on ebay but looking closer they are the old style flotation baskets . And it was 1/200 by Tom's not Flyhawk

[Fliger747]

Pontos puts those in the 1:200 Missouri set, the WWII variety. Looking into approximating these baskets by bending PE rail and adding some other small pieces from wire.

T

[stevegallacci]

I'm doing the Iowa per her Spring of '43 shake-down cruise from the Trumpeter Missouri (didn't know about the forthcoming release) and have a question. The conning station on the 8 level originally had only has a little platform space instead of the later full tower walk-around. I can't find any ref to any hatch to go with that original configuration(there were several hatches on the tower sides in the refit)

[Fliger747]

Looking at the photo on pg 14 of Stillwell's Missouri which shows her in the early camoflage the 08 level coming station looks much as it is today with port and stbd hatches to the external upper bridge. the drawings from this era confirm this on page 396 and 398. Access to this level was internal to the fire control tower.

T

[stevegallacci]

Looking at the photo on pg 14 of Stillwell's Missouri which shows her in the early camoflage the 08 level coming station looks much as it is today with port and stbd hatches to the external upper bridge. the drawings from this era confirm this on page 396 and 398. Access to this level was internal to the fire control tower.

T

Don't have that ref., but if the hatches are on the sides of the tower, then they are still the refit configuration. The original bridge area was limited to the front of the tower and did not extend beyond the front corner radii of the tower. My various later form refs show hatches on the tower sides that go with the wrap-around walkway. If the hatches flank the conning enclosure, that's the ref I need.

[Fliger747]

Shakedown photos show the bridge area as wrapping around.

Do you have some photos to info showing some sort of inaccessible platform?

Cheers. T

[stevegallacci]

[quote="Fliger747"]Shakedown photos show the bridge area as wrapping around.

Do you have some photos to info showing some sort of inaccessible platform?

The Missouri and Wisconsin had the full level 8 bridges from the start, the Iowa was built with the small bridge and the New Jersey was, at least, designed with the small bridge (don't know if it was built as such). I'll dig up a snap later.

[Fliger747]

Thanks Steve. the photo I had was of Missouri, which apparently doesn't help much. Will keep looking for Iowa photos. If there were no wings to the 08 level conning station it would have been almost unusable except for straight ahead steaming. Her initial CO would certainly have squawked about that, amongst other things. For CB1, Alaska that became the primary ship conning station as she had a catwalk around the armored coning tower much like the original Iowa configuration.

Cheers. T

[Fliger747]

Steve:

There is a photo on the USS Iowa.com website showing Iowa before the bridge was enclosed with the platform as you describe on the 08 level. Doesn't show it from the side however, will keep looking. Hard to believe they would have done this....

T

[Timmy C]

Here's a late '42 photo of Iowa: http://navsource.org/archives/01/061/016142f.jpg

Shows a full walkway around the conning tower to me!

[Fliger747]

Sumrall's book Iowa ClassBattleships shows a number of photos of the original configuration, though there has to be some access as one photo shows a whitehat standing on the platform in question. The later configuration has an arched protuberance with portholes in front of the helm position, it appears to be flat initially. The builders concept model shows a small area on each side abeam the coning station, why it wasn't originally built this way is an interesting question. Looks to be about the first thing they changed! Any evidence of a hatch at the front?

T

[stevegallacci]

Here's a late '42 photo of Iowa: http://navsource.org/archives/01/061/016142f.jpg

Shows a full walkway around the conning tower to me!

That, unfortunately, is just construction scaffolding, only the very front element will remain when done.

[stevegallacci]

[quote="Fliger747"]Sumrall's book Iowa ClassBattleships shows a number of photos of the original configuration, though there has to be some access as one photo shows a whitehat standing on the platform in question. The later configuration has an arched protuberance with portholes in front of the helm position, it appears to be flat initially. The builders concept model shows a small area on each side abeam the coning station, why it wasn't originally built this way is an interesting question. Looks to be about the first thing they changed! Any evidence of a hatch at the front?

That's the great question, none of the photos I've found so far, nor the various drawings, show any access to the open bridge area, even as the drawings show 'scopes and such on the bridge.

[stevegallacci]

A good shot of the original thing is on pg317 of Friedman's "US Battleships". Then on pg319, there is a shot of the rebuild, with a hatch on the side of the tower not there in the earlier version.

[Timmy C]

The one on page 317 appears to be a crop of this photo: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/016178.jpg

More from the same period on this page: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/61j.htm

I don't see any indication that the walkway terminates before the aft half of the conning tower? Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your observation.

[Fliger747]

My copy of Friedman has somewhat dark photos, but I found the same photos on line. Not seeing any decent photos as yet showing this in detail. Garzke-Dulin has no photos of this area.

T

[Fliger747]

Thanks for the photo. It is the platform on the 08 level under discussion. It appears that there might be a hatchway on the starboard side facing forward to allow access.

T

[Timmy C]

Ah I see - so not the armoured conn/bridge, but the tower "mast". Got it.

[stevegallacci]

Here's my progress so far on the model. And looking at the photo again (why wasn't I doing so when I did the work) I appear to need to redo the "can". It's squarish and shorter than I first thought, and I think I see the hatch just starboard of it. Thanks, everyone. Even having these shots, getting extra eyes on them and taking a good hard second look makes all the difference. The New Jersey drawings which include deck plans showed a squared "can" as well, but I didn't trust it at the time.

[Fliger747]

Steve: looks good, but is the convex portion of the pilot house supposed to be there? Certainly an interesting period to tackle!

Regards. Tom