Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[ArizonaBB39]

Nautilis' information is in fact correct. By the end of the war most ships had the cut outs planked over and all the 40mm guns at the same level. That's one place where my 1945 Yorktown will be inaccurate because I didn't do that. Tracy shows his modification job earlier on in this thread.

[Tracy White]

I know how difficult it is to mention such sad and higly personal topics.

He's 30 years old; I got past any difficulty a long time ago.

I suppose those were openings trough which ammunition and other stuff were handled <snip> Modelling the two levels in P/E I am afraid is beyond my skills.

Mine too. I spent some time looking for a good pair of hand-powered nibblers but haven't been able to find any that look like they would work; they're all too big for the cuts we need to make.

I've pretty much made up my mind to discard the PE catwalks and scratch build in regular sheet styrene; even in 350th scale I think the holes should be too small to see. But we shall see.... they do look very nice! Building them all in plastic would eliminate that problem at least.

I also made up my mind about buying the wood decks from Nautilus (certainly for CV14, may be for both).

I just looked over the chart James has for Tico and the wood decks and I think he's slightly in error. First off, I don't have any primary resource material; this is all based on photos from Classic Warships' CV-14 book and her DANFS entry.

He says deck #514 is good on Ticonderoga for 1944 and 45 but I believe it to be good until about fall of 1944; after that point I believe she had the "longer" deck. The structural work necessary to extend the deck was nothing that would be done at an anchorage such as Ulithi, and the latest she was anywhere that could have done the work (Pearl Harbor and San Diego) was mid October 1944. I'll have to e-mail James and see what sources he used to determine dates.

Can I ask all of you guys some practical advice on how to mount them ?

Double stacking the wood on the plastic deck raised the profile too much for my tastes... it looked wrong. That's why I decided to try thin plastic on the Lex kit. Wasn't entirely happy with that either.

1) round downs at stern/bow (probably to be addressed by epoxy putting and sanding just there),

Or you could by some plastic "quarter round" and glue it to the ends of the deck.

If I can dare to give a suggestion to you I would love if you could cast them as an add on to Trumpeter parts, rather than a full part replacement.

I've toyed with the idea of doing resin details sets but my scratch building skills are so-so and my casting skills non-existant. Additionally, I could probably easily double the price of the model with resin alone.

I also wander if the gallery deck extended between the 3 heavy deck transverse supports that are at the bow.
At extreme bow (further forward than the forward most deck support), I think there should be no gallery level deck below the flight deck, just the P/E catwals should do.

There was structure in some areas but not all. My Hornet pictures should help a little with figuring that area out, but for the most part you're right, there wasn't much under there.

I had not realised before looking hard at pictures how many improvements the Trumpeter kit needs.

"The book" started with my CV-13 Franklin kit, where I looked over some pictures I'd found at NARA and scanned in of her and compared it to the kit. I found something like 80 item groups ("move all directors to catwalks" count as one item even though it was multiple tubs) before I was halfway up the island! At that point I decided to do an article detailing these changes, but when I started talking to tohers about it they wanted me to also cover THIS ship or THAT ship, so the idea of the book was born. Most of the changes are fairly common and can be broken down and grouped by ship, so once the date details are known it's not that difficult to use that list to extend to other ships. There are still a couple of the ships though, that I don't have good information on. Such is the way of research. It gives me something to do while waiting for the Hancock and other 700th kits to appear [/quote]

[Tracy White]

OK, I'm completely unsure about Tico's Deck at this point. Murderer's row appears to show her with a short deck but a shot I have of her dated in November has the long deck....

[Luca Bevilacqua]

Hi Tracy, hi all guys,

well,... a picture is worth a thousand words (especially words by a non-native speaker).

This photo of Keith's build illustrates well what I was thinking of doing (and Keith actually did) under the flight deck, at the bow.
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html

Please look below the supports: Keith added a gallery deck level there.

The same idea came to me when considering the catwalks archways.
There were some located forward near the bow, where did they get to ?

So I tought may be the gallery deck extended past the foremost hangar bay bulkhead.
Or may be the archways near the bow just connected external to internal catwalks.
If I made myself clear in my last post (I seriously doubt it) and then if (another if) I got Tracy's explanation right, it may well be a mix of the two (some enclosed structure + some catwalk - may be even different from ship to ship ?).

I share Tracy's concern that the added thickness of doubling the wood over the plastic decks is a main concern (basically one that made me thinking of refraining from buying the wood decks, so far).

Did anyone think of sanding both to trim their thicknesses (upside of the plastic AND underside of the wood) ?
I think could work if one can find a way to not damage the wood surface detail on the opposite side, while sanding the below surface.

I am too lazy to even think about using thin plastic styrene below the plastic wood, and then building the gallery walls from scratch.
For the CV3 Lexington that would not be a problem...

About the possibility of any resin improvement set ,..
Well, just my two cents
if Tracy decides to do any of them, I'll be among his first customers.

Let me just add that probably external improvements, like the ones on the great pic you Tracy last posted, will appeal to more modellers than internal hangar details that are harder to notice if one does not put fyber in the hangar (not that I would not consider it/them too...).

Finally, Tracy let me thank you again for the great support you are giving me, while we wait for the right conditions for your book to come out.
I hope it will be soon...
I hope I am not abusing of your time, in teh meantime.

Ciao
Yours
Luca

[Tracy White]

This photo of Keith's build illustrates well what I was thinking of doing (and Keith actually did) under the flight deck, at the bow.
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html

Your link goes to the main gallery page and not the direct picture; do you mean this image?

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Been a while since I have visited this thread.
Pardon this intrusion.
Tracy et all:
I have been commissioned to build the Bunker Hill CV-17 as she appeared in the 44 period. I have already used the Shipcamouflage.com website to determine the Ms32-6a.
The guy who/m asked me to build this ship is related to a man who will receive this model upon his 80th birthday, (which will be August 1st), as a gift. He is unaware that he will be receiving this. I will build her as she she appeared while he was aboard. He was air/crew, (don't know a/c type right now), and was injured in combat 3 times during his stay aboard Bunker Hill. I have been given a disc that has copies of the ships' newspaper and all of its articles published for the crew, plus other very interesting information. You want to hear something really crazy? I remember seeing an old Essex class carrier in San Diego harbor, (north end of NASNI), up into the 1970's. It was the Bunker Hill! I knew back then that this was not a modern carrier, and was fascinated....WWII carrier man!
I was a modeler back then...too. This will be a full hull build of the 1/700 Dragon kit, (and I may use some of the Trumpeter 20's and 40's, if the customer will pay for a second kit). Has anyone noticed the disparaging hull length difference between the Trumpeter and Dragon kits????? We're talking half an inch!! My sources say 872 feet o/a length.....=14.95" The Dragon hull measures this length. The Trumpeter kit does not. Tough call!
Okay, here are my questions:
1)How many catapults on the flight deck?
2)Hangar deck cats gone?
3)Radar suite?
4)Island lay-out?
5)AAA arrangement?
6)Airwing and a/c types?
......7) How different from the Dragon kit out of the box are we talking here???
Many, many thanks for any input from anyone!
faithfully submitted, Tony Bunch
Iowa Class Fan

[Jose Chaica]

Here are some quick answers:

1) 2 cats
2) yes, they are not present.
3) will have to check...
4) late type, 40mm Bofors in front of island gone
5) will have to check
6) depends, but probably F6F Hellcats, TBF/M Avengers, SB2C Helldivers, and F4U Corsairs (not sure on this one...)
7) Can�t help you with this one too...

Even better, go to http://www.steelnavy.com/essex_data.htm, for a fine article on the Essex class carriers, that will answer your questions...

[Tracy White]

Sorry for the delay in response; last night was one of my national archives nights and I didn't get home until late.

Please look below the supports: Keith added a gallery deck level there.

According to drawings I have of CV-9 and CV-16 (Alan Raven's Essex Class book) and CV-11 ("Anatomy of the ship Intrepid") Essex and Intrepid didn't have anything like what Keith did. The drawings for Lex are inconclusive. They had some catwalks underneath and transverse beams, but no enclosed structure.

The same idea came to me when considering the catwalks archways. There were some located forward near the bow, where did they get to ?

To catwalks mainly. If you look at photo 80-G-242616 on Navource's CV-12 page (10 down) you can see catwalks at the corners that extend back. There were also some compartments inboard; there were usually clipping rooms near the 20mm galleries so you might see an open space and then a boxed off area.

I have been commissioned to build the Bunker Hill CV-17 as she appeared in the 44 period.

That period is not one I have a lot of information for. I have photos of her in January 1945 following repair and overhaul but only one shot of her in 1944 dated July 3. It's 80-g-255499 and there isn't a copy online but you can see if any of your friends who hang out there regularly will scan it for you... I'd have to pay to post it. Based on that picture:

1) 1 starboard
2) It's a bow shot so I'm not sure but it looks like it is still there. Based on the fact that she did have one when she commissioned and that the hangar cat was ususally removed at the same time the second flight deck cat was embarked my guess is that it was still there.
3) 1 SK port side of the stack. Looks like an SM on the forward tripod platform... probably a SG higher up aft of that. I can't see behind to tell anything else.
4) Short bridge, original quad 40mm still embarked.
5) Original, none of the extra quads.
6) Hellcats Hellcats Hellcats! Oh, and some Avengers. The SN Essex class page is all whacked out on CV-17 and the Go Navy! page isn't much help either. Naval War in Pacific 1941-45 may have you covered though. The original "Air Group 17" was comprised of VF-17 (Corsairs) VT-17 (Avengers) and VB-17 (Helldivers) but the corsair was seen as unfit for carrier duty and the "Jolly Rogers" made their fame elsewhere. VB-17 was the first to operate the Helldiver in combat however, according to this page and they operated on the carrier at least through March and probably longer, June if the "Pacific War" page is to be believed.
7) Which Dragon kit; CV-9 or CV-16?

A couple of comments. Both company's ships have the same waterline length but differ in other details. Dragon kits go together much easier than the Trumpeter kit, which has detail that looks a little finer.

Bunker Hill had a non-standard 17 painted on top of one of the rear dual 5" turrets at some point; I could see it in some footage I have. I'll try and watch it and pin down the date for you, if it's applicable to your build I'll post a screen shot.

[Tracy White]

Little post-note. Looking over the Navsource page again, I note that you can see the wing folds of Helldivers and grumman aircraft in mid 1944. Check it out; NS021703 and NS021718

[Luca Bevilacqua]

Tracy wrote:

Your link goes to the main gallery page and not the direct picture; do you mean this image?[

Yes Tracy, sorry for the mistake, that is the picture I meant to link to.

Thanks also for the great answer, I'll try do my best to replicate all this on my builds.

I am just wandering wheter I should pause their build (starting something else) to wait for your book to come out.

I think you mentioned 80 inaccuracies discovered.
I think I just figured (with much help from you) about 25.

Does the 80 figure also include improvements inside the hangar ?

Ciao

Luca

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
JMchaica and Tracy,
Thanks for your replies...and the link. The link says the BH was pretty much in her original config.
I am building the Dragon Essex kit.
Does this kit have all of the needed parts?
Thanks again..again..again..
Tony

[Tracy White]

Thanks again..again..again..

Hello? Hello?hello?
Echo!Echo!Echo!
Pinch hitting for Pedro Borbon... Manny Mota... Mota... Mota

Sorry, had a flashback from the movie "Airplane!"

I'll look over my Essex kit tonight; it's in a slightly different fit but not by much. I just have to check on the hangar cat and see if all of the pieces are there; the kit has some of the extra quads that Essex got in APril '44 but I think they included the hangar cat pieces as well (Which Essex never had).

Luca: don't wait; it could be a bit yet. I need to wait for the 700th Long hull kits and Even with that it might take a publisher half a year or more to get the book out. Feel free to ask away.

[MartinJQuinn]

I need to wait for the 700th Long hull kits

Saw the Trumpeter 1/700 Tico at the LHS yesterday...

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Tracy,
Looks like I can build the Buncker Hill pretty much, "straight from the box". That is good. I was hoping to do this anyway, as there will be little reward for clever scratch-building and extra, extra research. The Dragon CV-9 kit is my starting point.
the steelanvylink reads that Bunker Hill was unchanged from her original config up to Jan 1945.
Thanks for the help, and if you find any more useful tidbits please let me know.
...by the way...
I will match you and raise you one....."see a bra to booty-yakum, leg huh down and smak-em yak-em".........cold go to be.. ..."golly".
Yeh..I am brain damaged too
faithfully submitted, T-Bone
"the other type of ship fan"

[Tracy White]

The other thing I can report is that "17" I saw on the turret is late-service; there's a F4U visible on deck.

[Poppop]

Message for Tony Bunch:

Tony: Luca was asking in an earlier post about suggestions for mounting the brass barrels in the 5" open and closed mounts.

Several months ago you sent me picutures showing your handiwork. You may want to send them to Luca along with any words of advice. I haven't started drilling my first 5" yet, but do agree that it is worth the investment in time.

Respectfully,

Charlie

[Tony Bunch]

Hi Guys,
Thanks for thinking of me...Charlie.
Luca,
Here are a few pics of the L'Arsenal resin twin 5"38 mounts. I installed the L'Arsenal brass barrels, (available separately), into the L'Arsenal mounts this way.
I removed the barrel from the remaining, "insert end", of the resin barrels, (included with the twin mounts), by cutting them off flush. I then drilled the remaining, "insert end", to fit the brass barrels....one at a time... . As you will see in the attached pics, the, "insert ends", varied a bit, so I had to match the installations, "per turret..er..um..mount", and this was my quality assurance effort to have , "same-same", barrel elevation per turret.
here you go...






This is one way to fit brass barrels to a 5" mount...for your consideration.
faithfully submited, Tony Bunch
Iowa Class Fan

[Devin]

I have those mounts and turrets for my USS Essex build. Nice to see how good they look once put together. Thanks for the photos Tony.

Now to figure out how to put them on the open mount 5".

-Devin

[Adaks]

Just so that I am clear, Essex had a H2 catapult installed in May of 1943. Photos of her in December of 1942 show what looks like a catapult on the deck, but documentation shows that her catapult installation wasn't completed until May 6, 1943. There were two H4s set aside for her later in the war and held at Puget Sound, but she didn't make it back before the war was over. The photos I have of her in a 1949 overhaul show that she still had only a single, starboard cat, so we know she never got a second one after the war. Her H2 was NOT removed and replaced in April of 1944, so she had the H2 for the entire war.

Tracy, does it mean that starboard cat of USS Essex was different in size (shorter ?) then standard H4B of other ships of the class

[Luca Bevilacqua]

Hi guys, thanks for the great advice.

BTW Tony they look great...

I wander if installing in the plastic provided turrets would be any more difficult.

To save a few bucks I was thinking of buying just one resin dual turrets set, and use resin for the 2 lower turrets (with cupolas), and the plastic Trumpy ones for the 2 superfiring ones (that should not have cupolas on top, right ?).

I would also put blast bags only on the CV13 and not on CV 14.

BTW if any of you plans on improving the lateral elevator supports, please discard the method I used of gluing in place everything first and then scrape away the nonexistent portion.
It is probably more convenient (less work and neater result) if one cuts away the extra before installing.

Exercise extra care, tough, the supports would easily break off in this way.

Ciao Tony and Charlie and thanks again.