Calling all New Orleans-class (CA-32) fans

[Chuck Bauer]

Sorry, I'm talking about the numerals on the side of the hull fore and aft.

[Rick E Davis]

Hull numbers were not displayed on battleships, cruisers, or aircraft carriers during the 1930s. Even after the war started, some cruisers when they were repainted or touched up, painted over the hull numbers for periods of time until they had time to reapply the hull numbers. Ship recognition was fairly easy to determine the ID of a given ship during those periods without the hull numbers (except for destroyers that had been carrying hull numbers since WWI). Once new ships were added to the Fleet with many units in each class, plus with wholesale "green crews" manning them, keeping hull numbers visible was a necessity.

Chuck,

If you are modeling USS SAN FRANCISCO (or any other NEW ORLEANS class cruiser for any time frame in 1939), the ship would have by and large looked as they did during the late 1930's. The upgrades associated with WWII (the King Board Air Defense Improvements and things like installing radar) didn't start to appear on ships until mid-1940. For some ships they didn't START to get these mods until 1941 (very true for destroyers). The King Board ADI mods not only involved adding AA armament and splinter shielding, but also included structural mods to improve firing arcs and as weight compensation removals. Radars were slow to appear with the CXAM radars being the first "serial" installations, and they were on very few ships, some carriers, battleships and cruisers. Application of camouflage painting started in the Spring of 1941.

After WWII started in Europe in September 1939, the USN started to be restrictive on photos being taken of their ships as mods took place. There wasn't a "legal" ban on taking photos by civilians, media, etc, but they tried to "encourage" them to NOT take and release photos. This is why there are fewer images of USN ships in the 1940-41 period available. The World's Fair in 1940 was one of the last times when there were quite a few photos of USN ships taken and published by non-USN sources. By and large the photos taken then show no differences in configuration from the previous few years. Some media, LIFE magazine is an example, under USN "supervision" were allowed to take images of USN ships for PR purposes.

[SeanF]

Numbers on the hulls, no; but there was a period in the mid 1930s where they had them on a turret top (usually #2) for aerial identification (for the scout planes, I'd guess; superseded by the color coding scheme) There seems to have been no standard as to font, color, or orientation. Carriers, of course, had their abbreviated names on their decks rather than numbers.

- SeanF

[Rick E Davis]

The application of hull numbers on USN ships turrets (I only know of it being done on battleships) was done for large scale Fleet exercises.

[Chuck Bauer]

I've seen so many models with the hull numbers in place it seemed foolish to ask. But I'm glad I did!
Thanks once again gentlemen.

Chuck

[SeanF]

I mis-remembered the photo, it wasn't turret #2 on cruisers, but #3: Here's Chicago and Tuscaloosa sporting them (according to NavSource, it's Nov. 1936 at Mare Island):
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/029/0402910.jpg

I took a spin through Navsource; couldn't find any other photos of them on cruisers (low camera angle and/or intense glare off the turret roofs make it hard to see any detail most of the time) For the battleships it seems to be turret 2 and the photos I spotted them in have dates ranging between 1932 and 1935 - granted, Navsource's captions aren't always accurate. Are you sure it was only for big exercises? Arizona's glorious shaded "39" looks like something they would've kept around for a while. On the other hand, the cruddy "46" on Maryland here definitely looks like a throw-away:
http://navsource.org/archives/01/046/014646c.jpg

- Sean F.

[Rick E Davis]

The photos, for the battleships anyway, correspond to major Fleet Exercises carried out about once a year. The fleet divided into two groups and went through planned battle exercises. The numbers on the roofs were intended to keep track of the major units, since ships in one class could be divided between the two "Fleets". Other photos show that once the exercises were over, the numbers were painted over.

I stand corrected. I completely missed the numbers on those two cruisers. How that I look through Treaty Cruisers images I have, I do find hull numbers on turret roofs.

To mention a couple that I found. The use of "stripes" was much more common during the 1930s.

USS SALT LAKE CITY in April 1937. #2 turret.

USS CHESTER in April 1935. #3 turret

[marinR00]

Very slowly putting together my build for the San Francisco, 14 DEC '42.

viewtopic.php?f=59&t=167538

Working on the aft superstructure components. I know she took an 8" to battle II (Hit #41). I know there was a platform and splinter shielding up there as well. This is the only picture I've been able to find post-battle.

To me it looks like the 8" shell entered, left a oblique entry hole, and blew a 3'x4' hole. But it also looks like the splinter shielding was torn up as well(green arrows). I just wanted to see if anyone else had any photos or info. Just an outside shot, so I can capture this accurately. I haven't been able to find much outside this photo and the battle damage report...

54. On the port side another projectile, probably 8" from the left hand group of ships, struck the overhead of battle II at frame 109, exploded, and tore a 3 ft. x 4 ft. hole. The 30 lb. S.T.S. armored tube to the 5" director was penetrated by fragments in five places. The distance from the point of explosion to the armored tube is approximately 6 ft. Some fragments also penetrated to the after fire control station. Fragments and a fire started by the hit wrecked all instruments and equipment in battle II not previously damaged by the fire from the plane crash. This included gyro-repeaters, rudder angle indicators, engine revolution transmitter, own ships course repeater, engine order transmitter, compensating coil, and degaussing control panel.

[taskforce48]

Best I can do for you is this interior image I scanned at the Archives last year.

HTH

Matt

[taskforce48]

Also have these two for details.

[marinR00]

Best I can do for you is this interior image I scanned at the Archives last year.

HTH

Matt

Thank you! This is helpful...

and also humbling to remember what surface combat in the pitch black in the hot South Pacific must have been like. Truly humbling.

[Jeff Sharp]

Came across some cool pre-war New Orleans color footage.

[Jeff Sharp]

USS Vincennes 1942.

[Chuck Bauer]

Good morning gents,
From my previous questions here I learned that USS San Francisco probably had two 14-foot punts on board in 1939. Does anyone know where they might have been stowed? Atop the boat stacks on the aft superstructure's boat deck, perhaps?
TIA
Chuck

[bwross11]

Hi Chuck,

My references indicate they were actually 12ft punts and they were carried on the over hangar deck. I have a picture somewhere that shows them stacked on top of each other between the big boat stacks.

Bruce

[Chuck Bauer]

Ha, yes, after I typed my message I realized it might be a mistake. Thanks for the correction.
Sounds like they were kind of stowed randomly. I'll look for a logical spot up there. Thanks for the quick reply.

[Bas]

Hello,

Currently I'm in the last phases of building my 1/350 Trumpeter USS San Francisco. Would anybody here happen to know the color of the navigation lights? And yes, I am aware of the port light being red and starboard being green. But I'm not sure of the right color to put on on the whole light units on the bridge wing (see the attached picture). I can only find b/w pictures which do not give away more than a dark grey.

Anybody with a suggestion?

Thanks!

- Bas

[Chuck Bauer]

I don't know how to post images here but I have several photos of the San Francisco's navigation lights as they are displayed at the USS San Francisco Memorial in California. I think you are safe in painting the backboards the same color as the lights. I think they did that to make the lights more noticeable from a longer distance. I did it on my 1939 model and nobody has pounced on it as being "wrong." I would try looking up that memorial website and seeing if you can zoom in on the USSSF's bridge and catch a look at the lights.

[Bas]

Thanks Chuck, that is a good suggestion! I've googled some pictures, found the latter. So it would seem that you are right by stating I'd be safe with the backboards painted red or green.

Thanks again!

- Bas

[BB62vet]

Not to throw cold water on this topic, BUT...

Re: the picture sent in by BAS - I cannot recall seeing any USN warships with the navigation light FIXTURE being painted as shown in the photo - the metal housing was always flat black. Only the light lens itself was either green or red. This IMHO is an example of the exhibiting entity taking liberties that weren't present during the artifact's actual service.

Just my 2 cents worth...

Hank