The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Nov 20, 2019 4:53 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 401 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2019 6:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:14 pm
Posts: 7
Fliger747 wrote:
Remember the bridge was on I believe the 08 level of the fire control tower. Yes there were windscreens installed here, somewhere there is a photo of the Captain on the bridge and you can see the windows maybe 2-2.5' above the bulwark, attached to verticals maybe 4' apart? I presume these were either retractable or removable for battle.


Thank you. Yes thats the one picture of captain noble I've seen where he's on the bridge. Why would you remove them for battle? Wouldn't it be better to keep those screens because of splinters and weather?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2019 10:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 2285
do you want glass or plexiglass shards hit you during battle?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2019 8:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 204
Location: Houston, TX
Ha, I answered this exact same question (a literal cut and paste) over on the Shipbucket forum and even told the guy to come ask here if what I had provided wasn't useful enough. Here's the post: http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic. ... 01#p186601

I bet Rick Davis might know the exact date the windshields became widespread!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2019 11:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2018
Just a note on "splinters" these were a very serious danger to exposed positions outside the main citadel. Even gun shields and tubs are often made of 20 # (1/2") STS. Directors etc were often covered with somewhat thicker plate but not considered "armor" against first shell hits, but again protection against "splinters" resulting from nearby hits or even near misses.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 1517
Location: Mocksville, NC
Here is a photo of CB3 in Philly in 1947:
Attachment:
CB3 @ Phily 1947.jpg
CB3 @ Phily 1947.jpg [ 163.75 KiB | Viewed 801 times ]

You can see the windscreen frame and canopy on the Secondary Conn (upper level open bridge). This station is manned during entering & exiting port evolutions, not during General Quarters or at sea operations.

The Plexiglas windscreens are designed to give added protection against the elements for bridge personnel and I can say as one who has stood many bridge watches during good and also extremely inclement weather conditions that the windscreens were a welcomed addition - aesthetics be damned! When you're taking Greenies over the bridge in 35' Pacific swells, the windscreens were a welcome addition!

Just my 2 cents worth!

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) Late '40 1:200
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 9:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 204
Location: Houston, TX
Interesting stuff - I didn't know this station was not manned while at sea (GQ makes sense). I assume at-sea primary conn is inside the armored conning tower below the 40mm position atop the "bridge"? The photo of CAPT Noble on the bridge would indicate he's using the secondary conn at sea though.

Friedman's Cruisers quotes a letter sent by P. K. Fischler (the ship's first CO) mentioning the bad visibility from the conning tower position and how it was easier to conn the ship from forward sky control (I assume that means the 09 level forward).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 7:18 pm
Posts: 207
Location: Sydney, Australia
Most likely anyone else building the Hobby Boss 1/350 USS Alaska will be aware of this but whatever you do DO NOT follow the instructions when attaching the chocks (?), part K41 to the main deck. If you do you will not be able to attach the guard rail.

That will teach me to not study the instruction book right to the last page. :mad_2:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:14 pm
Posts: 7
Ian Roberts wrote:
Ha, I answered this exact same question (a literal cut and paste) over on the Shipbucket forum and even told the guy to come ask here if what I had provided wasn't useful enough. Here's the post: http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic. ... 01#p186601

I bet Rick Davis might know the exact date the windshields became widespread!


Nono don't get me wrong here I did not post here because I wasn't satisfied. I posted about the same time here because I was looking for models showing the screens. I thought maybe multiple people know stuff about this! I hope I didn't offend you or anything


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 3:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:14 pm
Posts: 7
BB62vet wrote:
Here is a photo of CB3 in Philly in 1947:
Attachment:
CB3 @ Phily 1947.jpg

You can see the windscreen frame and canopy on the Secondary Conn (upper level open bridge). This station is manned during entering & exiting port evolutions, not during General Quarters or at sea operations.

The Plexiglas windscreens are designed to give added protection against the elements for bridge personnel and I can say as one who has stood many bridge watches during good and also extremely inclement weather conditions that the windscreens were a welcomed addition - aesthetics be damned! When you're taking Greenies over the bridge in 35' Pacific swells, the windscreens were a welcome addition!

Just my 2 cents worth!


Really thats the secondary con? I'll add to Ian Roberts that I would like to know more about that because in the Pic of Capt. Noble he seems to be up there and I also read that passage in Friedmans book. During General Quaters I can understand going into the Conning tower but normaly at sea? this would inhibit visibilty of the CO, wouldn't it? The plan froM Floating Drydock calls it Conning Station. Also the plans in Friedmans book calls it Conn. Maybe you are confusing something here because of the comment that "any captain can chose to stay on the open bridge and get shot if he wants to" or something like that in Friedmans book?

I like those screens, I don't like open bridges all to much so I understand that you'd like em :heh:


Last edited by alexkon3 on Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:14 pm
Posts: 7
Okay I‘m reedditing this question because the question I asked here was answered a few pages earlier. Now for something different. How were the Alaskas as ships? I know that the Con was cramped and that it was found that the catapults were akward. We have one scathing review of the ship by captain Fischler and Admiral Rowcliff defending her. Besides Friedmans book there isn‘t much written and most of the articles mentioning her use Friedmans book as source. Even tho they came into service after their objective of killing cruisers and Panzerschiffe was gone how would they have faired? In friedmans book its noted that they had a problen manovering, is this a true statement or is it just hyperbole? Tbh I can‘t imagine a ship longer then NoCal to be realisticly super manoverable without sacrificing speed so what was expected? So what is the more balanced view of the Alaskas?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2018
In Service the Alaska's had a maneuvering radius of about 800 yards. The original pessimism was based on model basin tests. For comparison thins is very similar to and slightly better than the maneuverability of both Fletcher Class Destroyers and Iowa Class battleships.

Capt Fischler did not take Alaska into combat and some changes had been made after the original shakedown. Early in the war the Japanese Kongo's created considerable consternation for USN operational planners as they created significant issues for US carrier groups which were at the time escorted by cruisers. In reality the Alaska's were probably almost as useful as the Iowa's for the role in which they were employed as FAST carrier escorts against cruisers, destroyers and as AA ships. Though they carried not as many 5" and 40mm weapons as the larger ships, they were considered good gunnery ships and had good dispersion of the batteries and open sky arcs. For instance the centerline weapons are particularly effective. They only had two Mk37 directors, which is a little bit of a limit on multiple targeting, however in a pinch the Mk 51 units could also direct the 5" mounts.

When the steel shortage forced delay or cancellation of the Montana's, Kentucky and Illinois, construction on Hawaii was not canceled as there remained interest in the utility of the type.

Though the Iowa's 16" 50 was probably the finest Naval Rifle ever fielded by any power, the Alaska's 12" was also a very fine weapon. However logistics always play a role and having another large caliber round available for the fast carrier force tended to complicate things. We think that Joe might make a good Marine but we don't want to issue other than size nine shoes...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:21 pm
Posts: 3098
Location: equidistant to everywhere
BB62vet wrote:
Here is a photo of CB3 in Philly in 1947:
Attachment:
CB3 @ Phily 1947.jpg

You can see the windscreen frame and canopy on the Secondary Conn (upper level open bridge). This station is manned during entering & exiting port evolutions, not during General Quarters or at sea operations.

The Plexiglas windscreens are designed to give added protection against the elements for bridge personnel and I can say as one who has stood many bridge watches during good and also extremely inclement weather conditions that the windscreens were a welcomed addition - aesthetics be damned! When you're taking Greenies over the bridge in 35' Pacific swells, the windscreens were a welcome addition!

Just my 2 cents worth!



Regrettable a ship that close to completion was to be scrapped incomplete.

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2018
Various schemes were proposed to use Hawaii for other purposes, mostly with regards to missiles etc. However in any proposals to modify BB & CB's post war, their armor often proved the biggest obstacle, difficult to remove or alter! Additionally ships must remain in the water with appropriate balance and draft. Not insoluble problems, but ones that reduce the cost effectiveness. In the event such often somewhat experimental programs were conducted on existing CA hulls.

Weapon systems and ships often are affected by political sponsorship. Whether or not choice of Missouri as the site of the surrender ceremony was influenced by HST being a proud Missourian is an interesting question. Certainly states were proud to have a Battleship in service bearing their name.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 2285
except that the USS Mississippi was a battleship of the New Mexico class that was converted to a gunnery training ship including missile launchers in the late 40's.
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/41a.htm


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 3:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2018
Never as a serious combatant... However the hulls were large enough to suffer various removals and addons. Mississippi replaced Wyoming as a training and experimental ship as part of a 1945 post war program. The original plan was to remove turret 1 and replace with the new 6"47 DP , turret 2 by instrumentation, turret three by the new triple rapid fire 8"/55 turret later used in Des Moines. Turret 4 was retained. Additionally there were various other mounts of the single and dual 5"/54, some 5"/38, 3"/70, 3"/50 etc.

A smorgasbord ship to try out a little of everything. Early 50's the ship was outfitted to test and was the first to fire the Terrier 28-29 Jan 1953.

Many WWII ships were retained in the reserve fleet with reductions beginning from circa 1960 on. I remember seeing Massechutsets swinging at a bouy in Sinclair Inlet (1959?) before getting towed off to the razor blade factory...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:31 pm 
The Massachusetts was not made into razor blades. It is a museum ship at Fall Rivers , MA.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2018
You are of course correct! I saw way too many ships of that era be towed off, nests of destroyers, cruisers and the great lady "Bunker Hill". I am pretty sure that Indiana was there as well during that time.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2018
The bridge and pilot house on the 07 level was intended as the primary conn station except in Battle where the armored conning tower was to be used. Apparently this decision was arrived at after a long drawn out fisticuffs was finished with regards to use and value of armored conning towers. Originally an open bridge immediately above the conning tower was envisioned but placement of a 40 mm Quad in that location was considered essential. Initially it was thought that installation of a catwalk around the front of the conning tower (Ala SODAK and friends) would interfere with the 51 mount. However in the final event such a catwalk was installed, note photo of Hawaii.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 4:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:40 am
Posts: 379
Location: Vincennes, FRANCE
hello,

i read the whole thread but did not found anything conclusive concerning the famous bow step just below waterline.

is there some definitive comprehension about this point ?

thank you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2019 7:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 204
Location: Houston, TX
I'm also very curious about this topic. I have a set of plans that show the "stem extension for CB-2", but it's unclear to me 1) why this modification was required, and 2) if CB-1 also received it (and when).

Any info would be helpful. It's obvious from photos of CB-2's stem that it curves at a different angle than CB-1 (which makes me think the modification was indeed done to Guam), but Alaska photos aren't so clear.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 401 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group