The Ship Model Forum

Hi

I apologize if this post offends anyone but I was tipped off about this thread in particular recently and while I have tried, I have not quite managed to find the information I was looking for in it already so I thought I would simply ask. If my question is already answered please just point me to the answer in question and accept my apologies.

I have picked up a Revell 1:144 scale kit, the platinum edition one, that builds either USS Chevalier or USS Fletcher, however I would very much like to modify it and build a USS Taylor model instead.

From what I have found the difference between the USS Taylor and the USS Fletcher, when the USS Fletcher was identical to the USS Chevalier is only the armament, is this correct?

And if so, could anybody point me to a good picture/schematic/text description of what armaments the USS Taylor actually had around the end of WW2 as well as how it was placed?

I have tried a lot of different places but I cannot seem to find any clear consensus between the sources I have access to I am afraid.

If all this is available somewhere please do point me towards it, especially if it is in a no-digital format I could have missed it simply because information on US armed forces is a bit hard to get your hands on here in Sweden (though to be fair any information about armed forces can be hard to get your hands on).

Hi Sam(?),

You are asking a complex question that really depends on WHEN you wish to model USS TAYLOR (DD-468).

The Revell 1/144 scale FLETCHER kit has several accuracy issues and problems with claiming to be able to model USS CHEVALIER (DD-451) and really limits your "out-of-the-box" build possibilities. The biggest accuracy issues deal with missing items that are obvious in this scale and the wrong "Taper-back" Mk 37 director. ALL FLETCHER's had the "Square-back" Mk 37 director. For USS CHEVALIER and BIW built sisters USS NICHOLAS and O'BANNON, a quad 1.1-in mount is required instead of a twin 40-mm mount between 53 and 54 mounts (third and fourth 5-in mounts).

USS TAYLOR was completed to a "Four 40-mm" configuration with two twin 40-mm mounts; one mounted in a revised lower installation between 53 and 54 mounts and another twin 40-mm mount on the fantail. TAYLOR remained in that configuration (with more 20-mm guns added) until December 1943 when she was upgraded to the "Ten 40-mm" configuration with two twin 40-mm mounts before the bridge, two wing twin mounts amidships, and the twin mount between 53 and 54 mounts retained and the fantail twin 40-mm mount removed and replaced by three single 20-mm guns. If as it sounds, you are interested in modeling USS TAYLOR as she appeared at the end of WWII, this is the configuration you will need to use as your goal.

That will present you with some challenges. First off much of the Ten 40-mm configuration is NOT in the Revell 1/144 scale kit's box. Your options are to scratch-build what you need or to look for the multitude of 3-D printed parts available to make the changes easier (and more expensive) to accomplish. Also, you will be best served to get new armament and fire control from a 3-D printer firm, since you will need five twin 40-mm mounts and seven single 20-mm guns. To be honest, it is cheaper and easier to kit bash a Tamiya 1/350 scale Round-bridge FLETCHER kit with a Trumpeter 1/350 scale Square-bridge FLETCHER kit. Or just use the Trumpeter kit and replace the Square-bridge with a 3-D printed Round-bridge.

Here is what USS TAYLOR (DD-468) looked when completed, painted in Ms 22 for Operation Torch. She had only four 20-mm guns at that time, but at least three more were added in the Pacific.



Here is how USS TAYLOR looked after completing her overhaul/refit in January 1944.

To answer Hank Strubb's question about the "metal side ladder". It is shown in a drawing on page 92 of Raven's Fletcher AOS. Here it was shown as stowed on the port side on the inside of the midships bulwark. Of course a small item which could be stuffed almost anywhere, as in his Stoddard photo.

Cheers: Tom

Hi Rick.

My forum name is actually from an old nickname but Sam works.

Thank you very much for all the information provided. The reason I went for the Revell kit is actually because the 1:144 scale is better for me personally to work with and allows me to easier to scratch building and converting.

With the information you have so kindly I provided I at lest now know what extra guns I will need and where to place them which honestly was my major problem, this is meant to be a long term project anyway (I usually do wargaming models, mostly from Games Workshop but some others as well and they are more of a build-paint-done thing than anything longer term).

I will have to look into the 3d-print solution for parts as I unfortunately do not have one of my own.

Again thank you very much for the great wealth of information you are willing to share on the subject, as well as the photos.

Sam (or I normally like to use someone's name),

I'm not suggesting that you get a 3-D printer for do it yourself parts. Rather search for available 3-D printer firms in Sweden that you can order. I don't know if Sweden is part of the EU and/or you can get stuff from EU countries, but I believe that Shapeways is available in the EU (parts printed in the Netherlands I think). Some of the more prolific 3-D printer designers are printing items themselves and selling direct. Black Cat in France does great work, but at this time they aren't making many (if any?) items in 1/144 scale. I find new designers of 3-D items showing up all the time (and some old ones no longer doing so), and I can't keep up with them and have little to no knowledge of those available around the world.

The structural changes like "gun tubs" bulwarks and deckhouse alterations can be scratch-built since you have experience with that. It is things like weapons, directors, radars, etc that are "less-stressful" to just buy.

Ah yes, Sweden is in the EU so shapeways is accessible to us without any issues.

Also, I have a few friends with 3d-printers, my main issue is getting my hands on .stl files for the items in question.

And yeah, the weapons, directors etcetera is the main things I am looking at buying though I am thinking about seeing if I can simply get my hands on one of each and the for those that I need more of cast the parts myself as I have done so for a couple of other things with acceptable results before.

However as there is no rush for this project (it will take the time it takes, first part is making sure I actually have the space to work on it properly because I messed up when measuring my worktable, oops, and as such the hull is too long for it) I will most likely simply start looking around and see what I an find.

The main reason I bought the revell kit now was because it was on sale when I was looking at fletcher kits, about 40% off.

I might get a tamiya and a trumpeter kit and build before I build the revell one actually.

Once again, thank you for all the tips and information.

Sam,

Re. your comments about 3D printing/parts etc. and R.E.D.'s reply - this isn't as simple as it looks as I and another forum member are finding out first hand. There is a HUGE learning curve in both designing the parts and secondly either printing them yourself, or getting them printed by another party. I'm not trying to dissuade you, simply giving you the facts - it's not a simple a, b, c, we're done type of approach. This technology is still in its infancy and there is a vast arrray of programs & products out there that will entice you with their "claims" - realize that just like any other tool, 3D has its own set of "rules" and restrictions as to how to get from design to part.

My involvement is also for the Revell 1/144 kit although I'm turning it into a 1960s era 4 gun FLETCHER - and my build is over on Works in Progress (DD-566 USS STODDARD) - as such, the parts I'm designing are mainly at this point the tripod main mast, newer RADARs, antennas, railings, and so forth that are NOT part of the kit. The kit, while maybe one of the better ones (and larger!) on the market, still has its own set of mistakes and this is where well thought out and designed parts as replacements would be beneficial. Quite a few are already on the market (Model Monkey, for example). Also, a Shapeways Designer - DiStefan makes quality, scaled parts for this kit. You can spend your own time looking these up!!

The one advantage that I find in diving into this "sea of the unknown" is that fact that 3D parts certainly can come out a lot more detailed and accurate than scratch built ones - so, that's my draw on this.

When I purchased my Revell kit (from another forum modeler in 2017) it came with all the various 3rd party PE sets and as they are entirely geared to building the kit out of box, I am using some of these to augment kit & 3D printed parts as needed. My forum cohort and I have both decided that PE railings and such are simply 2 dimensional and not at all realistic, so are designing 3D railing replacements for our respective models that we are working on. This takes quite a bit of design time to get correct - trial & error. I don't think that whether you choose a low-end freeware design program or an expensive top of the line program with all the bells & whistles, etc. - that you can avoid going thru the learning process as to what will and won't work. That's a design basic, regardless.

By all means, go for it if that's your goal - but, I just wanted to give you a "heads up" that it isn't something you can do in a day (or week, or month, etc.).

Hope this clears the 3D air a bit,

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
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

Sam:

Hank's words are good advice to take in to account. I have gotten quite a ways into 3D for bits and pieces and have been going back and retrofitting a couple of models with replacement home printed "things". This included some previously purchased 3D items which I though I could better. Check out my APA project over in online scratch builds.

Hank's project is personally fun for Hank as he served on this Fletcher during Viet Nam. I drilled on one underway during the same period with the reserves, not nearly so exciting, but great ships!

I think for the multitude of fiddly bits that make an accurate and unique model, having a printer and being able to experiment and see what works and doesn't is a fun avenue. It is more of a steep learning curve than one might guess, but surmountable even for aging boomers (not the sub).

Good luck! Tom

I wish to once more thank everybody here for all the help and advice and also state that this just confirms what I suspected, the project will be a fun but long-lasting one (which quite honestly is something I need, a steady project to go back t and work with between the sea of smaller ones that come from my usual wargame-based modelling).

Unfortunately I am yet to find a way to actually work on it in the apartment (as I mentioned before, I made a mistake when measuring my worktable) so it might have to wait for a while to truly begin, but that just gives me a reason to do a couple of other interesting projects beforehand to train with modelling tools etc. as I am quite rusty with that.

And just to calm any worry, the project was from the start expected to take 1-2 years IF it was only minor changes needed, as it is I will now have a lot of time to get my hands on the extra armaments needed before I can even start with the actual hull.

I might pick up some other models to shake off the rust regarding scale models first actually, once where I will be satisfied with building the kits as-is even if it might not be 100% correct as the USS Taylor project is already marked as somewhat of a showpiece project for me, that is why I came here after all, trying to make sure I had the correct information and got everything right.

The main wreck of USS Johnston (DD-557) has been located.
https://caladanoceanic.com/expeditions/samar/

NOTE: Edited to remove broken link; mods deleted the original post for reasons unknown.

_________________

MS State Guard, 08 March 2014 - 28 January 2023

Starting work on a scratch build of the O’Bannon. What is the thing mounted to the front of the forward stack? It has what looks like two pipes leading up to it. I’m guessing those are com links as it looks like a part of the gun control or radar system. Any help?

If the items you are looking at are on and at the top of the stack, they are the steam whistle and siren. Not fire control.

That’s fantastic! Thanks for setting me straight. Great picture. Appreciate the help.

Hello everyone, and hello mr. Davis, 'cause if anyone can help me, it's you.

So my friend can't for the love of God decide what Fletcher-class DD he wants to build. This time it's USS Richard P. Leary as JSDF Yugure. Are there any documents in existence regarding the state in which the ship was given to the Japanese? The superstructure, the AA positions etc. etc. It seems like it had been extensively modded by Americans post-war.

Thanks in advance.

Most of the FLETCHER class destroyers "Lend-Leased" to allies post-WWII in the late 1950's were modified to some extent (sometimes a complete modernization) and ensured that they were in working order with an overhaul prior to the transfer. However, both USS H. L. EDWARDS (DD-663) and USS RICHARD P. LEARY (DD-664) were an unusual case. The Japanese wanted to modify these two units themselves and requested no modifications or overhaul prior to the turnover. So the USN only rigged the two destroyers for towing and they were towed to Japan in their as Mothballed outfit at the end of WWII configuration. Both had five twin 40-mm mounts and seven 20-mm guns, along with both torpedo tube mounts. The JMSDF did a complete mod (actually several over the time of the service with the JMSDF) of these two prior to service, focused on ASW. So photos you see of either unit in JMSDF service showing modifications, were NOT USN applied alterations. They were mostly used as trial platforms for equipment to be used on units they built in Japan.

Thanks, mr. Davis.

I assume since it's Japanese-made alterations you don't have any documents regarding exactly what they did, aside from photos, that you could share. Or do you?

They added Sushi Bars to the Steam Line??? .......

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
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

I don't have any documents/drawings on the JMSDF FLETCHER's. Other than old JANE's FIGHTING SHIPS manuals. The USN would take photos of allied ships in join operations when they occurred. So, there were photos of the previously transferred, in 1954, GLEAVES class units in 80-G collection. However, the two FLETCHER's were transferred to Japan in 1959 and most of the 80-G "Misc" photos at NARA end in ~1957. There are scattered photos after that, but none of either of these two FLETCHER class units. Navsource have a few images of these two units. See links below. Also, JANE's FIGHTING SHIPS manuals in the 1960s and early 1970's, before these two were removed from service in 1974, have some technical details and small images. This would be a reasonable source to "track" changes to these units over the years.

... http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/663.htm ... http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/664.htm ...

You could try searches online for info on these two. I didn't have much success, but clicking "images" did produce a few images.

Thanks for your help anyway, mr. Davis, have a nice day.

Was there a logo or insignia on the front stack of the Hazelwood DD-531. Would it have been put on after fram refit. Joe