Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[Adaks]

Do you know if the empty track was set up for the length of the H2 cat she eventually got, or the H-4 that was intended? And if the latter, would they have filled-in the extra length of track past the end of the shorter H-2? Just thinking that if they didn't, then visually there might not be any significant difference when modeling her - just where along the track the catapult cables should connect to an airplane if you wanted to portray a launch.

- Sean F.

I think that this picture tells everything.



Regards

Adam

[SeanF]

Thanks Adam - I'd never seen that shot before.

Interesting... relative to the elevator, that rectangular patch seems to be in just about the same spot the Dragon kit puts it. Then the dragon kit has a fine groove going further back beyond it, to a different rectangular outline not quite to the back end of the elevator (See: http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/sh ... v9-03a.jpg ) So it would seem the part to fill-in is pretty minimal... I think I'll give it a try!

Do you happen to know when that photo was taken? I always thought she wore black deck numbers (when she had them at all), but that sure doesn't look black; perhaps gray yellow, or a dirty white? Unless it's glare?

- Sean F.

[Adaks]

It seems that Dragon USS Essex kit uses the standard flight deck with one H4 catapult. I think that Dragon decided not to create new deck with H2 cat because it was not economical (only CV-9 had such a configuration).

In regard to color of the deck numbers it is also a little bit strange for me. But if you watch this short film you will also see "light" number on deck (2:53). Maybe photo was taken at the same time (Battle of Leyte Gulf) ?

[Tracy White]

Dragon molded the H4 catapult because they didn't know any better at the time. Keep in mind it's over a decade old at this point.

[Adaks]

Yes, Dragon 1/700 USS Essex was released in 2005. I thought it was newer. I have known about that H2 catapult since 2006, thanks to your post Tracy.
As far as I remember at that time common knowledge was that CV-9 never had a single catapult fitted - she did not have catapults installed on the flight deck (although some sources claimed that she had two installed during her first refit in n 1944).

[Tracy White]

There's been a lot of refinement and expansion to what we know about the class in the last decade. Still a lot to nail down, too. I'm still working on the AN/APS-6 and SCR-70 radars and any sort of documentation for deck spotting. But, I would say we have all of the large featured for the class nailed down at least.

[KeithHufnagel]

hello all! I have been out with an illness since 2013. Glad to see Yorktown is being well remembered. I've been been building US light cruisers and destroyers lately but Yorktown is always my favorite. Great to be back!

[Tracy White]

Hey Keith - glad to see you back!

[skrakow]

I have searched this forum (but do admit I have not read all 115 pages yet) - is there a conclusive answer to how many 40 mm quads Bunker Hill carried during 1944?
I am in the early stages of building the Dragon Essex and would like to use it as a starting point to build Bunker Hill in the unique dazzle scheme she carried in 1944. Did she carry 8 or 10 quads at this time, i.e. did she have the two additional quads fitted on starboard aft, hangar deck level?
Or would the Dragon Hornet be the better pick (as she has the additional starboard aft quads) for a starting point?

Any advice much appreciated.

Regards from Germany,

Stefan

[ModelMonkey]

hello all! I have been out with an illness since 2013. Glad to see Yorktown is being well remembered. I've been been building US light cruisers and destroyers lately but Yorktown is always my favorite. Great to be back!

Great to have you back! Hope your illness is all in the past.

I have searched this forum (but do admit I have not read all 115 pages yet) - is there a conclusive answer to how many 40 mm quads Bunker Hill carried during 1944?...did she have the two additional quads fitted on starboard aft, hangar deck level?

She had those two Bofors in May, 1945 but my references are unclear for 1944 so hopefully others will have that answer for you. If she did have them in 1944, you can see the Mk.51 director for one of those mounts in this amazing photo taken just after the horrific Kamikaze attack that knocked her out of the war. Also of interest is how the whip antenna was fixed to the ship. You can see clearly the swivel and counterweight. Notice that the whip antenna is supported by wires.

[Tracy White]

They were there in 1944 but I don't know precisely when they were installed. Her December 1944 - January 1945 overhaul paperwork (Departure Report) lists as complete "Remove 2 40M/M quads at frames 159 1/2 & 188 and relocated outboard sponsons at frames 160 & 189, starboard main deck level."

[skrakow]

Thanks, Tracy. That's conclusive enough for me - Bunker Hill indeed had two additional quad sets (and not the 'elaborate' ones on blister platforms) starboard aft, during her 'dazzle period'. Which is, by the way, contradicting res. correcting the info contained here:

http://www.steelnavy.com/essex_data.htm ... iconderoga

However, it does confirm info given in here:

http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/bo ... craft.html

Will divert my Dragon CV-9 Essex into an early CV-10 Yorktown, and will use the Dragon Hornet as basis for Bunker Hill.

[Charybdis]

I've just bought a Hasegawa Yorktown II 1/700. I would like to paint her in the end of war MS 21. I'd like to know if there were any more alterations to her radar set after the Sept '44 refit. I have a stack of photos of Yorktown in '43 and '44 but only one from '45 in MS 21. Thanks and merry Christmas to all. Ps. If anyone has a photo of her late war set up, I'd be much obliged if you could share.

[ModelMonkey]

I've just bought a Hasegawa Yorktown II 1/700. I would like to paint her in the end of war MS 21. I'd like to know if there were any more alterations to her radar set after the Sept '44 refit. I have a stack of photos of Yorktown in '43 and '44 but only one from '45 in MS 21. Thanks and merry Christmas to all. Ps. If anyone has a photo of her late war set up, I'd be much obliged if you could share.

Here are three photos showing "before" and "after" views of Yorktown. The first two photos are "before" views from September 1944. The last view is dated April, 1945.

The photo dated April 1945, published in "Warship's Data 5: USS Yorktown CV-10" by Robert F. Sumrall, page 35, shows that the SM fighter control set she received during the 1944 refit had been replaced with the lighter weight SP. The large SK "bed-spring" air-search antenna on the port side of the funnel cap was raised (pole made taller), perhaps to reduce interference with the SC-2 air-search antenna on the starboard side of the cap. Sumrall states that the SC-2 was used as a backup to the SK radar and was electronically similar. Although difficult to see in the photos below, the SC-2's lattice mast height may be slightly shorter in the the April, 1945 photo.

There may have been other changes after April, 1945 but not the addition of an SK-2 dish-shaped antenna before wars-end. Sumrall states that the square-shaped SK was not replaced with the dish-shaped SK-2 on Yorktown until after the ship went into reserve.

Hope this helps!

[Tracy White]

The first two photos are "before" views from September 1944. The last view is dated April, 1945.

Just so everyone's aware, the first two photos are different versions of the same image, highlighting different information.

I have Yorktown's Departure Report for the late 1944 overhaul at Puget Sound Navy Yard but nothing for later than that - however the repair ships that did work on ships in the forward Pacific were either very bad at forwarding summaries of work or the Bureau Ships was bad at collecting and keeping such reports. There are obvious differences in Steve's photos but I see no mention of a SR radar, for example. I'm not sure when the changes happened, but since the April 1945 shot has her in Dazzle still, they obviously happened early enough for you to consider them for your build.

[MAJOR-B]

Good day,
I was inspired by one my patients at the VA I work at. He was telling me of time on the Lexington CV 16. He proudly wears a kamikaze survivor hat. He found out I was thinking of building a blue ghost in 1/350 time frame late 45 he ask me everyday how is she coming? I have both the USS Yorktown and Franklin in 1/350. Which one would be the best starting point?

[SeanF]

Good day,
I was inspired by one my patients at the VA I work at. He was telling me of time on the Lexington CV 16. He proudly wears a kamikaze survivor hat. He found out I was thinking of building a blue ghost in 1/350 time frame late 45 he ask me everyday how is she coming? I have both the USS Yorktown and Franklin in 1/350. Which one would be the best starting point?

Yorktown.

- Sean F.

[Tracy White]

a blue ghost in 1/350 time frame late 45

You'll want to consider Army Quad .50 cal mounts (photo), although I don't know if anyone has popped them online at Shapeways, etc., yet.

[Vladi]

Yorktown.

- Sean F.

Just CV-16 Lexington belonged to the "long-hull" Essex-class ships (see http://www.steelnavy.com/essex_data.htm ... ll%20Ships:) as opposed to both CV-10 Yorktown and CV-14 Franklin, so modification to the bow should be considered if you want to be correct.

[jpeeler]

Just CV-16 Lexington belonged to the "long-hull" Essex-class ships (see http://www.steelnavy.com/essex_data.htm ... ll%20Ships:) as opposed to both CV-10 Yorktown and CV-14 Franklin, so modification to the bow should be considered if you want to be correct.

Lexington was a short-hull ship, as were Yorktown (CV-10) and Franklin (CV-13).

Jodie Peeler