The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:37 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 837 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 12:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 10886
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
Navsource does not allow hotlinking (that is, using the [img] tags to make pictures automatically show) - they'll only appear if you've already viewed the images recently and they're already saved onto your computer's temporary files.

In the future, please just post the link to the Navsource image, and skip the [img] tagging step. People will have to click on the links to view the images manually.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:14 am
Posts: 208
Location: SE Michigan
Timmy C wrote:
Navsource does not allow hotlinking (that is, using the [img] tags to make pictures automatically show) - they'll only appear if you've already viewed the images recently and they're already saved onto your computer's temporary files.

In the future, please just post the link to the Navsource image, and skip the [img] tagging step. People will have to click on the links to view the images manually.


Sorry I didn't realize that since when I looked at a preview the pictures were there. I have added the links to the former posts.
To be honest I always thought the B-25s were lined up like the model kits from the 60's and 70's showed for launch until I got to see the real photos many years ago.
The photos make a lot of sense for a long voyage like that.

_________________
Our CO prior to flying to the boomer: “Our goals on this patrol is to shoot missiles and torpedoes.”
Junior Nuke Officer (me) : “Captain, don’t we really want to be like Monty Python and ‘Not be seen’?”
CO “You seem to be missing the big picture”
“Oh”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 2:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:14 am
Posts: 208
Location: SE Michigan
Vlad wrote:
Yeah, I've studied all the photos on Navsource but still didn't feel like I had the complete picture, that's why I asked. Your photos aren't showing so I assume you meant this one:

Image

I count 6x B-25 on the starboard side behind the island, front 5 angled inwards, rear one facing straight. Then 7x B-25 on the port side, front 6 angled inwards, rear one straight. Then 1 B-25 lined up for take-off, bottom right of the picture. That's 14, so 2 missing, presumably out ot of shot to the right? That means 3x B-25 lined up alongside the island, facing forward, correct?

Also, how on earth was the picture supposedly of Doolittle's plane taking off even taken from that angle? And if that is Doolittle's plane, then all remaining B-25s on the flight deck are parked angled inward?


The photo your talking about is not Doolittle it is the aircraft 3 since there are 13 left besides the plane preparing to roll. The photo actually is labeled "plane number 3 or 4 taking off", but it can't be #4.
The first 3 planes were alongside the island. Planes #2 and 3 were angled slightly to give Doolittle the longest run they could. Doolittle had the shortest takeoff run though.

I'm assuming the photo of Doolittle could have been a cameraman with a telephoto lens from whichever ship was forward and slightly to port.

_________________
Our CO prior to flying to the boomer: “Our goals on this patrol is to shoot missiles and torpedoes.”
Junior Nuke Officer (me) : “Captain, don’t we really want to be like Monty Python and ‘Not be seen’?”
CO “You seem to be missing the big picture”
“Oh”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 9:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 481
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
All of the B-25s were spotted for launch behind the island and began their take-off roll also from behind the island. The first fourteen were arranged in an alternating chevron pattern with their noses pointed inward about 30 degrees (a guess) toward the ship centerline, the last two aimed parallel to the ship centerline and their mainmounts located right at the aftmost edge of the flight deck - one aircraft slightly ahead of the other to clear their wingtips. In Doolittle's autobiography he states (and other references agree) that he had 467 feet of deck in front of his plane's nose. That point on the deck is just a few feet aft of the #3 1.1" gun tub. All the planes took off from essentially that same place. In photo NH 53420 above, the number 3 aircraft is lined up parallel to the ship centerline and left of it. In the photo it is aft of, and has not yet rolled forward to the takeoff spot. The three men on the flight deck in front of the aircraft nose are standing on the expansion strip in the flight deck which is aft of the #2 elevator. The nose of Doolittle's plane, with 467' of deck ahead of it, was just a few feet aft of the forward edge of the #2 elevator - out of the picture to the lower right.
There is a picture you will find in your searches that shows a B-25 taking off at the HORNET's flight deck bow edge. It is bogus for two reasons: None of the B-25 pictures taken during takeoff show the aircraft anywhere near the bow as they lifted off, and the obvious second question is: where was the photographer standing? It is a still from the movie "30 Seconds Over Tokyo". Here is a real shot obviously taken from the forward port catwalk. It is quite evident the nose wheel is already off the flight deck and the B-25 is hanging on the props.

Attachment:
HornetTakeoff - bow shot.jpg
HornetTakeoff - bow shot.jpg [ 54.57 KiB | Viewed 744 times ]

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)


Last edited by John W. on Mon May 13, 2019 4:50 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 481
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Here are two more pictures.
Attachment:
launch.JPG
launch.JPG [ 333.02 KiB | Viewed 708 times ]


This is the actual launch location for all the B-25s. I cannot tell if this is Doolittle's plane because the BuNo on the rudder is not visible. It is probably 50' forward of the photo posted above. The aircraft nose can be seen to be just aft of the #2 elevator forward edge. The expansion joint referred to in the picture above can be seen between the starboard nacelle and the fuselage and also just under the port wing. The previous picture was probably showing the bomber warming up the engines, the second picture here the B-25 has rolled forward to the launch point where the launch officer has the checkered flag raised.

Attachment:
B-25_Taking_off_carrier_frontal_view.jpg
B-25_Taking_off_carrier_frontal_view.jpg [ 45.69 KiB | Viewed 708 times ]


This is the bogus picture which is a frame from "30 Seconds Over Tokyo". At first it looks pretty good without other photos to contradict. I remember after a few seconds saying to myself "Where is the photographer standing?"

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)


Last edited by John W. on Wed May 15, 2019 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 4:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1445
Location: England
Thank you for the very detailed answer :)

I'm struggling a little to make it all fit though. I need to cut all my B-25s off their sprues to do it properly, but with just a couple and "leapfrogging" them to approximate their position, it doesn't seem physically possible to get that take-off position with the requisite number of aircraft on the deck behind. I'm not even close. Neither the ship nor the planes seem out of scale, so I don't know what's wrong. Probably I'm not placing them accurately, but it sure is tight!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 9:50 am
Posts: 5
I am putting together all of the components for my ultimate Hornet carrier in 1/700 scale...I have the Tom's Hull replacement, Gator masks, PE, 3D printed bridge, etc.

I am missing one bit of info: anyone know what kind of deck markings/striping the Hornet wore at this time? Also, wasn't it common for USN carriers to paint out their hull numbers on the deck in combat areas?

Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 481
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Vlad -
It IS a tight squeeze, but it can be done. First things first. I didn't see if you are modeling in 1/350th and which kit. There are differences among kits regarding flight deck lengths when referenced to USN plans.

Photo NH 53420 is your friend. Look closely at it. Notice a couple of things. The B-25s are not all parallel to each other in each line. Look at the rudders on the next to last portside aircraft - they appear wider in the photo meaning that aircraft is angled a bit more toward the ship centerline than the others ahead of him. Also note that all the starboard rudders on the portside aircraft are close to the following aircraft's fuselage and in front of the following plane's port engine nacelle. Note that the overlap of the wingtips between the portside aircraft line and the starboard aircraft line becomes less and less as you move toward the number one aircraft. This is the result of the port edge of the flight deck tapering outward until it turns parallel to the ship centerline at the aft end of the island (Trump deck is wrong on this, ending the taper at the aft end of the #2 elevator). It appears to me that each aircraft in a line has one mainmount on the very edge of the flight deck as shown by the decreasing wing overlap. Also note that the port wing of the last aircraft on the starboard line is not visible. The flight deck is not wide enough at the stern to have two B-25s side by side and parallel to the ship centerline and not have them overlap wingtips. I would suggest that last starboard line aircraft is rotated to its left so its nose points well in toward the ship centerline so that its left wing is behind the starboard wing of the other tail end charlie B-25 to port and not visible. My message in all this (so far) is that the planes are carefully placed to compress them together to the maximum, so they are not all parallel parked at a fixed angle.
Plane three is probably warming its engines in the photo. The spot he has just vacated is on the starboard side, so Doolittle's plane was either parked to starboard ahead of #3, or was spotted on or near the launch point, parallel to ship centerline, offset to left. Note also that #3 parking spot is aft of the last crash barrier (retracted onto the deck) so that also gives another fixed reference point for positioning the parked aircraft on a model. I have never seen photos of the positions of the #1 and #2 aircraft before launch - photos which show BuNos on the rudders or some similar identifying marks to prove it is the #1 or #2 parked before the launch (Would love to be proven wrong.). If the #1 was parked on the launch point, #2 might not have been parallel to #4 to create clearance for #1. Accounts I've read say it took about five minutes to warm up and launch each bomber so the planes could have been jockeyed around to create clearance.
My main point is that there were likely very small clearances between aircraft, and that the aircraft are not carefully arranged into parade-worthy dressed lines. But they were secured so as not to damage each other in the heavy seas encountered. Quite a job, especially when the original mission was speced for fourteen mission aircraft (plus one to be launched for pilot morale boosting). I think the modeler will have to at least assemble all 16 planes in order to properly position them.
Other interpretations are welcome. I want my model finished correctly, so I don't mind being proven wrong to get to that point.
HTH,
John

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)


Last edited by John W. on Wed May 15, 2019 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 1:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1445
Location: England
Thanks again :wave_1:

I'm building the Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. Is there an issue with the flight deck length on it? The hull shape forward is wonky but that's not relevant to the deck spot, I thought it was in scale at least.

One thing you said that just clicked for me, the bombers were not all warmed up at the same time? That means they wouldn't need clearance between the props of one and the rudder of the next, should be able to squeeze tighter. It will take me a little while to fully build all of them, but I might make that my priority for this project to be able to test the line-up!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 9:50 am
Posts: 5
Hornet2019 wrote:
I am putting together all of the components for my ultimate Hornet carrier in 1/700 scale...I have the Tom's Hull replacement, Gator masks, PE, 3D printed bridge, etc.

I am missing one bit of info: anyone know what kind of deck markings/striping the Hornet wore at this time? Also, wasn't it common for USN carriers to paint out their hull numbers on the deck in combat areas?

Thanks!


*BUMP*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:14 am
Posts: 208
Location: SE Michigan
To conserve fuel, they would start when notified by the navy plane captain. They were VERY close on fuel to get to China, as proven by the fact that all planes except for the one interned in Vladivostok were losses.

_________________
Our CO prior to flying to the boomer: “Our goals on this patrol is to shoot missiles and torpedoes.”
Junior Nuke Officer (me) : “Captain, don’t we really want to be like Monty Python and ‘Not be seen’?”
CO “You seem to be missing the big picture”
“Oh”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1445
Location: England
Captain Morgan wrote:
To conserve fuel, they would start when notified by the navy plane captain. They were VERY close on fuel to get to China, as proven by the fact that all planes except for the one interned in Vladivostok were losses.


Understandable, but I thought it was standard procedure on carrier take-offs to run/warm engines for longer and reduce the risk of engine failure on take-off, as it's a very high load condition with no safety margin.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 3:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6709
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
Hornet2019 wrote:
Hornet2019 wrote:
I am putting together all of the components for my ultimate Hornet carrier in 1/700 scale...I have the Tom's Hull replacement, Gator masks, PE, 3D printed bridge, etc.

I am missing one bit of info: anyone know what kind of deck markings/striping the Hornet wore at this time? Also, wasn't it common for USN carriers to paint out their hull numbers on the deck in combat areas?

Thanks!


*BUMP*

Did you scroll through the entire thread? I want to say the question about the deck markings was asked - and answered - previously.

There were no numbers on the deck on USN carriers prior to 1943. I believe the practice started when the Essex and Independence class started entering service.

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 3:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:38 am
Posts: 1292
When you say you are doing the model in this time frame, are you meaning the Doolittle raid, before the raid or after the raid?. It is different for all three. It was asked an answered previously but I can clarify if needed.

_________________
Gabriel
Current Builds:
Fujimi Hiryu 1/350
Trumpeter San Francisco 1/350
Dutch Harbor PBY 1/350

Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 9:50 am
Posts: 5
Quote:
Did you scroll through the entire thread? I want to say the question about the deck markings was asked - and answered - previously.

There were no numbers on the deck on USN carriers prior to 1943. I believe the practice started when the Essex and Independence class started entering service.



I read a lot of the thread but honestly I work full time and don't have enough time to read through all 41 pages...is there a way to search the thread for this specific question? Thanks.


Also, concerning deck numbering, in photos I have seen of the USS Princeton in combat don't appear to show deck numbers during the time of her loss---anyone with different info (pics) I would love to hear from, as I am building her as well...thanks to everyone.


Last edited by Timmy C on Tue May 14, 2019 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
fixed quote


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 4:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 9:50 am
Posts: 5
Angeliccypher wrote:
When you say you are doing the model in this time frame, are you meaning the Doolittle raid, before the raid or after the raid?. It is different for all three. It was asked an answered previously but I can clarify if needed.


I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 8:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 2293
nothing on deck but has her number on the hull below the front of the flight deck. http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/022317.jpg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:38 am
Posts: 1292
Hornet2019 wrote:
I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.


At that time the Doolittle stripes where present but had been painted over using 20B. So they looked like darker lines on the deck. Similar to the metal areas on the flight deck (elevators and the main seams). Keep in mind that 20B is supposed to be the same shade as 250N that the deck is painted in but in practice actually came out a bit darker. So simple “preshading” by painting the stripes and metal areas black then airbrushing over the top should work.

Also note that her Measure 12 Mod was touched up after Midway. The areas that changed are forward the the 5/1 through 5/4 gun galleries and aft the 5/5 through 5/8 galleries.

The two bow 20mms were replaced by another 1.1”. The gun tub is very different for that mount.

The 20mm gallery on the starboard side of the island had four additional guns added to it extending aft from the current four. The splinter shield was also extended.

The platforms that extend out of the hangar deck at the forward doors should also be removed.

If you care about her plane load out it was F4Fs, SBDs and TBFs.

I cannot remember the differences to her radar at that time.

_________________
Gabriel
Current Builds:
Fujimi Hiryu 1/350
Trumpeter San Francisco 1/350
Dutch Harbor PBY 1/350

Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 7:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 9:50 am
Posts: 5
Angeliccypher wrote:
Hornet2019 wrote:
I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.


At that time the Doolittle stripes where present but had been painted over using 20B. So they looked like darker lines on the deck. Similar to the metal areas on the flight deck (elevators and the main seams). Keep in mind that 20B is supposed to be the same shade as 250N that the deck is painted in but in practice actually came out a bit darker. So simple “preshading” by painting the stripes and metal areas black then airbrushing over the top should work.

Also note that her Measure 12 Mod was touched up after Midway. The areas that changed are forward the the 5/1 through 5/4 gun galleries and aft the 5/5 through 5/8 galleries.

The two bow 20mms were replaced by another 1.1”. The gun tub is very different for that mount.

The 20mm gallery on the starboard side of the island had four additional guns added to it extending aft from the current four. The splinter shield was also extended.

The platforms that extend out of the hangar deck at the forward doors should also be removed.

If you care about her plane load out it was F4Fs, SBDs and TBFs.

I cannot remember the differences to her radar at that time.
At Angeliccypher:

Thanks for the much needed info....

My build will consist of a Tom's Resin Hull replacement, Trump flight deck, 3D printed Hornet Island and various components for the weapons, a/c, PE , etc.
In my opinion this "kit-bash" is the best hope of getting an "accurate" Hornet for Santa Cruz.

Any differing opinions out there? I would love to hear other perspectives.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:34 pm
Posts: 481
Location: Smithfield, Virginia
Vlad wrote:
Thanks again :wave_1:

I'm building the Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. Is there an issue with the flight deck length on it? The hull shape forward is wonky but that's not relevant to the deck spot, I thought it was in scale at least.

One thing you said that just clicked for me, the bombers were not all warmed up at the same time? That means they wouldn't need clearance between the props of one and the rudder of the next, should be able to squeeze tighter. It will take me a little while to fully build all of them, but I might make that my priority for this project to be able to test the line-up!


Vlad -
I am working in 1/350 so I can't comment on 1/700 kits. I know I found a number of errors in the 1/350 models - some easy to fix, some not. Flight deck length was one error on one kit, the position of the #3 elevator was wrong on another. The USN plans are both good and a curse since you have the best documentation for the overall ship, documentation that the model makers sometimes do not duplicate. And the bad news is that you have the correct plans that some model makers do not follow faithfully. . . .

Looking again at NH 53420 you can see that plane #3 is turning the props (looks like they are at slow speed from the prop blur) and #4 is now clear in front of him, so he is turning up his props with most everyone standing well clear. No other plane has its props turning - look carefully and you can see the prop blades stationary on all of them you can see. When the planes were spread out during the transit to the launch point it was possible to start the engines (which they did every day) to make sure all was in order. There are videos that show this.

One more thought on the prelaunch deck spot. In Doolittle's book ("I Could Never Again Be So Lucky") he says he and LT Miller, the Navy pilot who helped the Raiders learn short take offs, got into the cockpit of Doolittle's plane after it was spotted for launch the day before. Doolittle, looking toward the ship's bow, questioned whether there really was enough room to get airborne (in a B-25 that was loaded 10,000 Lbs over maximum design weight). Miller assured him there was enough room. This suggests, but doesn't prove, the #1 plane was spotted at or close to the actual launch point from the start, and that Doolittle was looking out his windshield with some misgivings. And plane #2 could have been parked to starboard in front of #3 to allow for the offset to port location of #1 positioned at the launch point.
I'm thinking Doolittle was maybe remembering Eglin:
Attachment:
short takeoff 3.jpg
short takeoff 3.jpg [ 192.34 KiB | Viewed 534 times ]


Attachment:
bent b-25.jpg
bent b-25.jpg [ 32.71 KiB | Viewed 534 times ]

_________________
Some people make you happy, then they leave.
Others make you happy when they leave. (apologies to Oscar Wilde if he ever said anything similar, of which there is some doubt . . .)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 837 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mark McKinnis and 13 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