Calling all USS Yorktown CV-5 fans

[DennisJP]

To be honest yes it looks like an SA radar. It is to small for an SC radar and most likely used for fighter direction control since it had IFF. Until the SP radar came in 1944. Also probably used for a back up in case the CXAM took damage.

[Michael Vorrasi]

Yes, I recall this one. The antenna in question also appears on Hornet prior to 7/42, on the lower tripod platform, and also atop Lexington's pilot house (I think. Dick, correct me if it was flag bridge). It is possible that this was an early IFF interrogator. If an early SA, that also makes sense because the fleet was upping the big carriers to two main air search sets each at the time. This could have been an early trial of a backup set, but SA was really too small for a carrier. I recall someone posting photos of an Independence class CVL that had this antenna, or one very close, and identified it as a specific model antenna. Wish I could find that thread. I will look for it.

Found it, Independence class thread, page 13 bottom of the page. It is identified by Carl Musselman as a YG homing beacon, however, it is not the same antenna as the one on CV-5/8/2. Close, but not the same. We are still unresolved on this one.

[Dick J]

The one on Lexington proved to be the square version of the FC (MK-3) fire control radar. It was mounted on the forward 8" control position, ironically after the 8" guns were removed. According to some sources, it was never made completely operational before Lex was lost. The Yorktown antenna is obviously not an FC. That still leaves the question open. Lots of experimentation going on during those years and a deep paranoia about documenting some of it!

[Cheerfultitanic1]

http://i1293.photobucket.com/albums/b59 ... 4ym5od.jpg

Can anyone identify this model for me? It's of the USS Yorktown, and has a motor which may or may not be stock. My Dad built it with his Dad when he was about 7 I believe, if that helps. He's 37 now.

[Timmy C]

That's the Essex class Yorktown, CV-10, not the earlier CV-5 ship this thread covers. That said, it appears to be the Lindberg 1/520 scale kit, since that was the only kit of a WWII Essex class with a full hull 30 years ago.

[TOMLABEL]

Thanks Mike, Dick and Dennis!!! Y'alls' information is very helpful as usual!!!!!

TOMLABEL

[DennisJP]

One this also. Look at the mount it is mounted on. The mount looks like the SP mount that is a IFF antenna on the Essex class. Most air search radars are mounted on more of a flat mounting. The Radar on the back of the Hornets smoke Stack Mast is a SC Radar. Remembering if you look at an earlier picture of Hornet before the refit after Midway you see this radar mounted inside the tower mast in the front. Hornet was different. Her tower mast was not enclosed like the other to ships.

[DennisJP]

http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020831e.jpg

I do not know if it posted earlier my browser is on the fritz but here is a photo of Hornet and if you magnify the forward mast tower bellow the SC Radar on top you will see the Radar in question as ell that is on Yorktown's stack. Also the radar on Hornets mast behind the stack when she sank as a SC radar.

[DennisJP]

I have a question I just noticed from two pictures. The famous dry dock picture before Midway and a picture of Yorktown when Ballard found her on the bottom of the ocean.
In looking and comparing the two pictures it seems the iconic bridge wing platform in front of the bridge that made Yorktown look so different as the other two has been removed before going to Midway.
Maybe so she is not different from the Enterprise? After Coral Sea Battle, I am sure the Japanese reported her sunk. Your thoughts?



In this picture there is no jagged edges of torn metal or missing paint. That would make me think it was ripped off in the decent of the ship. It looks to me the ship yard removed it.

[DennisJP]

Here is a picture of Yorktown sinking. To look closely you can see the cat walk in front of the bridge. So the cat walk in question must have been ripped off the ship when it sank. sorry for disturbing you guys.

[Dick J]

It was still there following the dive bombing attack, so no, it was NOT removed by the yard at Pearl!
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020506.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020535.jpg

[CLASSIC WARSHIPS]

Hey Guys !

Just wanted to say thank you for all of the wonderful information that you all have posted here in this discussion. It will be most helpful to me as I begin work on my Warship Pictorial on the CV-5. For my color covers, now inside, as well as the outside covers, I will have to create a lot of color "artwork" for all of the four surfaces. One of these will be a color illustration of her Ms. 12 camouflage pattern, and maybe a pre-war light gray illustration. The others will be colorized B & W photos.

I do have a question. I have the GB of P on CV-5, dated 1940, late, I think, but I am looking for a drawing of CV-5's final configuration, or at the least of an overhead image, showing all the 50 cal. and 20 mm positions. What is out there?

By the way, the Alaska Class Cruisers book went to my printer on Thursday. It will be released in two/three weeks.
.........and yes, there is a Square Bridge Fletcher book in the works !

Thanks again,
Steve Wiper
http://www.classicwarships.com

[Michael Vorrasi]

Hey Guys !

Just wanted o say thank you for all of the wonderful information that you all have posted here in this discussion. It will be most helpful to me as I begin work on my Warship Pictorial on the CV-5. For my color covers, now inside, as well as the outside covers, I will have to create a lot of color "artwork" for all of the four surfaces. One of these will be a color illustration of her Ms. 12 camouflage pattern, and maybe a pre-war light gray illustration. The others will be colorized B & W photos.

I do have a question. I have the GB of P on CV-5, dated 1940, late, I think, but I am looking for a drawing of CV-5's final configuration, or at the least of an overhead image, showing all the 50 cal. and 20 mm positions. What is out there?

By the way, the Alaska Class Cruisers book went to my printer on Thursday. It will be released in two/three weeks.
.........and yes, there is a Square Bridge Fletcher book in the works !

Thanks again,
Steve Wiper
http://www.classicwarships.com

Steve, the 1940 plan is the newest available plan for CV-5. It should show the walk around placed in front of the battle bridge and possibly, the CXAM on the foretop, but no 20MM and only the original 50 Cal. layout, plus no splinter shields. Her AA upgrades were only partially complete when lost. Much of it was Ad Hoc. The most accurate diagrams of her final AA layout are the 3 drawings right here in the beginning page of this thread. Gordon Bjorklund put these together and Dick J confirmed. Read Dick J's several confirming posts for more detail. I too add my concurrence. Consider it authoritative, better than anything the US Navy could give you, because their own records are messed up (they cannot even get the OA length right in DANFS) and incomplete, and because many of the 50 Cal. positions were off the books, set up by the crew unofficially. Also, recommend you go through both CV-6 and CV-8 threads, as we often cross-decked with general info on the class.

[CLASSIC WARSHIPS]

Michael,

I was beginning to suspect what you have said !

Thank you,
Steve Wiper
http://www.classicwarships.com

[Gordon Bjorklund]

FYI: Yes, I did the three drawings of the Yorktown's gun layout. I thought that it would be nice to have a visual aid of what Dick J had posted on the Steel Navy message board
back in December of 2003 and again in November of 2005. Those pictures were done because Dick J supplied all of the information to do them with in his SN posts to help
other modelers many years ago.

[John W.]

And now someone has finally brought out a more extensive P/E set for the Merit YORKTOWN kit - Eduard. No wood flight deck, but I'd say most of the rest of the non-Flight deck pieces that matter are in the set of four packages. Check Eduard's online site or Freetime's for photos. Eduards site has photos of the model and you can download the instructions. Good step forward for those of us who have paused some of the construction steps waiting for better parts such as catwalks.

[robertmelvin]

SWMBO got that kit for me for my B-day. She's in the stash now awaiting the after market to come out. Eduard's offerings are tempting, but I think I'll wait to see if LionRoar or FlyHawk come up with one of their "detail up" sets. And, I can't imagine that somebody won't do a wood deck for her soon.

Bob Melvin

[Devin]

I have two of the Eduard sets already, and will get the other two in the mail tomorrow. Hopefully i can do a review next weekend. Im not a fan of wooden decks, so i didnt feel a need to wait. But as i plan on building at least two Yorkies, I'll try something else for the second build. The Eduard sets do look nice, especially the perforated catwalks.

[robertmelvin]

Devin, I'll look forward to seeing that review. For me, the jury is still out on wooden decks as I have yet to actually use one. I did buy the Artworx deck for my 1/350 U.S.S. Indianapolis (Academy), but I'm not sure if I'll use it or not. One area where I do see them as being beneficial is in dealing with some of the older kits, especially Trumpeter's offerings, like the U.S.S. North Carolina, which has notorious seams between the three parts of the kit deck. A wood deck could save a lot of filling, sanding and rescribing of detail. It seems that the better kits these days have such good OOB decks that wood is almost overkill.

My position on this question is definitely to each his own.

Bob Melvin

[John W.]

I have two of the Eduard sets already, and will get the other two in the mail tomorrow. Hopefully i can do a review next weekend. Im not a fan of wooden decks, so i didnt feel a need to wait. But as i plan on building at least two Yorkies, I'll try something else for the second build. The Eduard sets do look nice, especially the perforated catwalks.

Devin -
Hey! How's things?
Today I just got the first of what I think is two sets (long story) of the Eduard P/E I mentioned. There are lots of things to be commended on the sets and I like what I see (not trying to influence you either way). But I did see something that perhaps you could check with your sets. All the catwalks (there are some on all four sheets I think) have the perforated holes on them - in fact, the holes show on both sides. And they look smaller than the perforations on other sets by other manufacturers, so that could be the problem. But almost none of them go all the way through the brass sheet on my sets. I can see some that are partially through, so I think they are meant to go all the way through the way all other sets do. I wonder if mine were pulled from the etchant a bit too soon. Curious if yours are that way also. It would seem that if they didn't mean them to go through, they wouldn't have the hole pattern on both sides as that is some fancy etching. I have sent an e-mail to Eduard about this, and I'll pass it along when I hear back.