Calling all Iowa-class (BB-61) fans

[BB62vet]

R.E. Davis wrote:

It is a matter that they were removable for stowage elsewhere when not being used. At sea and not loading ammo, they likely were stowed away.

Well, NEW JERSEY during her 1968-69 commission never removed them - they were there in place during her second mothball period (1957-67), her third commission (06/68-12/69), her next mothball period again (12/69-11/82), her fourth commission (12/82-02/91), her subsequent mothball period and final museum position (03/91-present).

I do have photos of IOWA/WISCONSIN at Philadelphia in mothballs (1950s-1980s) where those davits were missing - so, it's probably true that during WWII and The Korean War periods and later mothballing during which those items were stowed elsewhere (probably below decks).

[Rick E Davis]

I stand corrected.

On destroyers davits and small cranes were or could be removed to get them out of the way.

I'm surprised they left such devices on and exposed while in mothballs. Maybe they wee permanently attached on some ships?

[BB62vet]

Rick,

Actually, I'm surprised that they WERE removed during the WWII/Korean periods. They aren't exactly items of equipment that are in people's way during normal course of the day, whereas, davits, tripods, and other deck located equipment could get in the way of day to day routines and were stowed on bulkheads or below decks. In the instance of MISSOURI being the locale for the surrender ceremony, I can see where removing those davits would be beneficial for many people occupying tops of turrets to get a closer view of the proceedings.

Hank

[Rick E Davis]

Were they used at all in underway resupply? They were heavy-duty for handling 16-in rounds and could be used as a securing point if needed.

In my destroyer research, underway resupply required some ad hoc structures during WWII not planned for in their design. During the 1950s all new equipment was developed and added to ships to make the process faster and safer. Some of the first equipment was found to NOT be strong enough and required a quick redesign.

My thought on removal was that during combat and firing they may not be considered as safe from coming loose or in being hit and fouling up something like a rangefinder. On NEW JERSEY they may have been more or less made permanent?

[BB62vet]

Rick,

Underway replenishment and at-sea refueling required additional equipment but to my knowledge did not involve the turret ammo davits; they were strictly used for 16" ammo storage. Replenishment tri-pods were utilized on turrets 2 & 3 as illustrated in the following photo of my Turret #2:

This shows the ammo davit as well as the tri-pod set up on it's stbd side location; there are also two other alternative positions on the port side where the tri-pod could also be located for use. Normally, it was stowed laying down with the 3rd leg laid flat behind it. Here is a shot of my turret #3 with similar equipment:

There were only two locations on turret 3 where the tri-pod could be set up. The curved davit was also set up on the turret top for use in lowering items from time to time.

We also had two at-sea refueling locations on the stbd side - two replenishment tri-pods and the at-sea refueling boom. Here is a photo that shows the after stbd tri-pod and boom:

The tri-pods were used for both refueling evolutions and taking on stores and ammunition (crates). They were struck down when not in use.

The '80s refitting saw the refueling stations replaced by the large refueling boom on the stbd main deck just fwd of turret 3 (all 4 IOWAs) and an additional sliding pad-eye kingpost installed on WISCONSIN - photo shows both boom & kingpost:

Hope this helps.

Hank

[Rick E Davis]

Hank,

I'm not talking about Post-WWII underway replenishment, I'm talking about during WWII before the specialized equipment was developed and installed. I have seen so many personnel transfers and underway refueling of destroyers with lines tied to whatever hard points were available on battleships (and carriers and cruisers as well). Sometimes refueling, personnel transfer, and mail transfers are going on all at the same time!!! It may have been decided to leave these ammo davits permanently or practically permanently attached for misc purposes as well. A quick look at the photos I have of the IOWA class battleships don't always show these ammo davits in place early on during shakedown and such. Except that they almost always show on NEW JERSEY and WISCONSIN, plus it seems to be a more robust design? A Philadelphia Navy Yard design??

This May 1972 photo I took onboard USS IOWA (with a very cheap camera ) shows the davits secured to the roof top of #1 turret, turned inward. So they "could" be moved if desired.

[James M]

I suspect on the Missouri that it was the Captains decision to not have them mounted all the time.
He may have thought they detracted from his idea of what the turrets should look like.

Throughout all the Iowas history's there have been instances of such thing happening and even things that were more odd than that.


James

[BB62vet]

Rick,

That's a photo I had not seen (of course - it's one of yours!!!). So, that adds an interesting bit of info to the puzzle. I was not aware that they would have been stowed (for mothball purposes) inward. That DOES prove that they are at least moveable to some degree. As far as the design of the individual davit goes, I could very well agree that the shipyard doing the installation may have altered the "class" design to better suit the needs of the ship at hand. In actuality, I can't say that the davits are different from ship to ship - one of those details overlooked when on board ship. I do have recent photos of WISCONSIN that shows these davits as being bolted to the turret roof with a small round (pole) brace added for lateral strength.

James M,

I seriously doubt that the CO would have equipment removed for "cosmetic" purposes. I could see them removing equipment as a safety issue during periods of high visitation (such as the Surrender Ceremony).

Hank

[Guest]

Hi folks!

I had fall in my lap a NIB Sterling USS Missouri kit. I am an RC model boat builder and sailor, and this will be my first warship build. I am unwilling to disgrace the Mighty Mo by building the propulsion as the kit dictates (one propeller! GAWDS!) and want to build the hull with accurate propulsion of four props, two 4 bland and two 5 blade. I am planning on building the hull with wood but scratchbuilding from the main deck up with styrene, using the existing wood parts as templates. Details will be (hopefully) scratchbuilt from styrene as well, with maybe a bit of 3D printing as well. Etched brass detail parts will be at a minimum as much as I can. Propulsion will be 4 Graupner Speed 280 motors, or RS380's if I cannot round up the Speed 280's. It will have separate control for the two port props and the two starboard props to help with steering control.

Anyway, that is my plan. My cry for help is for a plan, photographs, or a resource to look for to do the stern hull section correctly. Any guidance or suggestions would be much appreciated.

[ModelMonkey]

Great project!

Here is a good start for plans: https://maritime.org/doc/plans/bb63.pdf

I also recommend getting the "USS Missouri Plan eBook" from The Floating Drydock (http://www.floatingdrydock.com/books.html - about a third of the way down the page). I am in no way associated with The Floating Drydock, other than as a very satisfied customer.

[BB63Missouri]

Hi folks!

I had fall in my lap a NIB Sterling USS Missouri kit. I am an RC model boat builder and sailor, and this will be my first warship build. I am unwilling to disgrace the Mighty Mo by building the propulsion as the kit dictates (one propeller! GAWDS!) and want to build the hull with accurate propulsion of four props, two 4 bland and two 5 blade. I am planning on building the hull with wood but scratchbuilding from the main deck up with styrene, using the existing wood parts as templates. Details will be (hopefully) scratchbuilt from styrene as well, with maybe a bit of 3D printing as well. Etched brass detail parts will be at a minimum as much as I can. Propulsion will be 4 Graupner Speed 280 motors, or RS380's if I cannot round up the Speed 280's. It will have separate control for the two port props and the two starboard props to help with steering control.

Anyway, that is my plan. My cry for help is for a plan, photographs, or a resource to look for to do the stern hull section correctly. Any guidance or suggestions would be much appreciated.

I purchased the Sterling Kit in the 90's. On completing the hull as per the plans I decided I wanted to build the model with four props and a more accurate shape. I rebuilt most of the model from a plan I purchased from the Floating Drydock. I have the plans, numerous fittings, photoetch parts too numerous to list here.
I no longer need them. Let me know if you would like any or all of what I have.

David

[InchHigh]

USS Missouri (BB 63) conducts a firepower demonstration off Port Jackson, Sydney, Australia, October 1986. Missouri was there to participate in the naval review commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Royal Australian Navy conducted by HRH Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh.



If you look to the far left of the picture, two 16" projectiles can be seen in flight.

[InchHigh]

A bows-on view of Missouri, shot at the same time as the previous photograph. "Bravo" flies port and starboard. Note the two sailors visible on deck which give good indications of scale.

Images deleted due to Photo*uckit.

[InchHigh]

Missouri entering Port Jackson for the 75th RAN Anniversary celebrations. The Sydney boating community turned out in force though out the port visit and Missouri was a focal point. Modelers should note the extent of the non-skid coating on the fantail - each of the Iowas had different areas covered with Missouri having the most non-skid of the four sisters. Also note the two boats stored on "trailers" on the fantail, a detail which many kit manufacturers overlook. While their locations could be changed, these were part of the normal complement of ship's boats and were always carried.

Images deleted due to Photo*uckit.

[kfgodsey]

Hi! Model is almost complete. Working on animating everything that moves in the turret and it has been a royal pain. Below are two videos on Youtube that I posted today for comments from you guys. The first is a slide show of the various decks and the gun house. The second is a animation of the shell rings on the projectile decks. I used the NAVORD-OP-769 as my guide along with all the pics I could find on the net. I could not find any pics of the Electrical deck or the insides of the 17 foot circular bulkhead on the projectile decks. Also, no useful pics of the powder cart.

Some of the pics in the slide show have been update since I made it several months ago, but if you see any flaws, please let me know. I am not trying to be exact, just want to make something useful. Not planning to sell it either. Just for fun.

Slide Show: https://youtu.be/eFCP4izjIvA

Animation: https://youtu.be/OnJcfCJq_Ms

Thanks

Keith

[anj4de]

Hello all

I have just received the Academy 1/700 Missouri. I now have the chance to compare it with my Tamiya Iowa (New Jersey). I have checked out most of the main parts and they are interchangable with the Tamiya ones. The Academy kit is just a slight bit less detailed then the Tamiya one...and to compensate this it has less missing details! Tamiya kits miss the directors for the quad 40s on turret 2 and 3 and also just behind the quads next to the front armored structure (where New Jersey later had it's swimming pools!) Academy has those. What really makes the Academy kit special is the mask and PE set that is included in the Modeler's Edition. I am looking fwd to using those.
All in all I personally belive the Academy kit gives the bigger bang for the buck and you get a full hull on top of it as well. With just a little bit of scratching and scraping the details can easily be brought up to Tamiya level. Price wise here in Germany the "Modeler's Edition" equals the price of a Tamiya ship. I will post pictures once I have found a new hoster. My PB still works but only until the next payment term...

cheers
Uwe

PS: Steve, Model Monkey...your New Jersey round bridge fits the Academy model just as good as the Tamiya one!

[ModelMonkey]

[SeanF]

You know, swapping out the bridge from a Tamiya Iowa or Missouri (or now, the Academy Missouri) with the MM part has got to be about the easiest sister-ship conversions there is, giving you a Big J in her very distinctive round-bridge '43-44 fit. Only minor AA & radar alterations beyond that. I highly recommend it to anyone as a first step into a broader world of ship modeling!

- Sean F.

[ModelMonkey]

Thanks Uwe and Sean!

Here's where to get one:

1/700: http://shpws.me/KYWr
1/600: http://shpws.me/M4vQ
1/535: http://shpws.me/Loks
1/400: http://shpws.me/M4w1
1/350: http://shpws.me/KY81
1/200: http://shpws.me/L2Wz

Here are renderings of the bridge in 1/700 scale:

[Brett M]

Thanks Uwe and Sean!

Here's where to get one:

1/700: http://shpws.me/KYWr
1/600: http://shpws.me/M4vQ
1/535: http://shpws.me/Loks
1/400: http://shpws.me/M4w1
1/350: http://shpws.me/KY81
1/200: http://shpws.me/L2Wz

Here are renderings of the bridge in 1/700 scale:

Uh oh....that's tempting to grab for my WW2 Missouri and convert to New Jersey. Quit it!