Calling all Benson-class & Gleaves-class DD fans

[Dick J]

I think the short answer is "yes". From what I can tell, there was a fundamental difference between the Benson and the Gleaves classes beyond the powerplants. If you go back to the Sims class, photos of the ships at launch show the deckhouse aft of the stack in place, but the area of the stack is open down to the main deck. The stack itself was a "freestanding" structure that was added during the fitting out process. The Benson's seem to follow this practice, with "freestanding" stacks fore and aft of the deckhouse between them. However, unlike the Sims class, walkways were extended around the stacks from the deckhouse. The actual trunking was still exposed on the sides, plus forward of the first stack, and aft of the second. On the Gleaves class ships, the trunking was fully enclosed in extensions of the deckhouse, a practice continued on the Fletcher's and later DD's. Rick Davis might be able to verify this out of his photo archive.

[Jamie Alguire]

Gentlemen, for best accuracy, should I modify the forward stack trunking of a newly-purchased prewar 1940 Benson DD-421 kit 1034? Gordon Bjorklund and many of you worked on Laffey and Woodworth on this forum from APR-JUL2009. And, were all thirty Bensons constructed in this way? Thanks

Hey David/Martin:
I also found these 'undercuts' at the base of both stacks. For Woodworth/Laffey anyways, heres a pic showing Woodworth
Its an easy fix, just run a saw along the seam.

Martin - those colors match well - I may try to match with Acrylics tho.

[Rick E Davis]

Man I hate it when I accidentally delete a post before hitting "Submit".

Dick has summed up the stack uptakes and walkways installed over the forward stack pretty well. Two of the six original pre-WWII BENSON's and all 24 of the Repeat-BENSON class units, were built by Bethlehem Steel Ship Bldg at four different yards. All of them had the same trunking arrangement. See the Inboard Profile View drawing from the Request for Proposal Contract Drawings. Note, that if the 5-in/38 Practice Loader had been installed in the location as shown, there would have been a deck over the forward trunking.

Also, note that the "cowling" at the base of the stacks, are vents for the boilers below.



It isn't important for building a model of a pre-war configured BENSON or early war BENSON's, but late in the war some BENSON's had a "false deck" installed forward of the first stack behind the bridge for stowage of materials. See the attached cropped images of this area. Note that in the last view, you can see the curved trunking as it enters the main deck.

[David Sandifer]

Thanks Dick, Jaime, and Rick. I'll have to review those 2009 forum pages for changes around the aft stack.

[Jamie Alguire]

Great pics Rick, so crisp!
David:
Do you have the DML Laffey kit? Heres how it depicts the aft stack arrangement:
My 1/350 Laffey in progress

[David Sandifer]

Hi, Jaime

Yes, I have the DML Laffey kit. The prewar Benson appears to have the same M-sprue parts as Laffey. Whew - no major refit there!

From your third photo, I see that you've constructed the forward stack trunking already. Where did you slice off the midships deckhouse (part B1)? How did you shape the trunking block itself, and from what material(s)? Please post photos of that area.

In order to show off all the added work involved, I'm thinking about turning the davits and positioning the two forward whaleboats outboard - otherwise all the extra effort is hidden.

Regards, David

[Jamie Alguire]

Hi, Jaime

Yes, I have the DML Laffey kit. The prewar Benson appears to have the same M-sprue parts as Laffey. Whew - no major refit there!

From your third photo, I see that you've constructed the forward stack trunking already. Where did you slice off the midships deckhouse (part B1)? How did you shape the trunking block itself, and from what material(s)? Please post photos of that area.

In order to show off all the added work involved, I'm thinking about turning the davits and positioning the two forward whaleboats outboard - otherwise all the extra effort is hidden.

Regards, David

Hey David:
Heres my work in progress; Im taking the 'easy' way out by sanding/scraping down the deckhouse forward edges to mimic the vertical casing ahead of the stack, but instead of cutting away the deck, am filling (hiding) the forward casing area with consumables & storage; these vessels had various items such as lumber, stores, crates etc. with all the changes Im having to do to the base Laffey kit, I have a limit! By looking at sister ship Woodworth, the casing doesnt have a dramatic shape difference from what Ive done.
Items to note:
1. walkways on forward casing ahead of forward stack, note re-located storage lockers, they fit nicely
2. mods on bridge 02/03 deck, ie cut down rear wings with railing, visor, my best guess on railing config.
3. staggered 20mm tubs midship, including added deck pieces
4. on stern deckhouse, note the filled-in cutouts next to the aft steering stn and the added deck overhang forward. Also, note the significant changes required (documented previously, Woodworth pics)
5. on searchlight platform, note extra little deckhouse portside (last pic); luckily this is included in the kit...
next up, lets look at the foremast! Cause Laffeys is a bit different from the kit! Yay!

[David Sandifer]

Thank you for the detailed close-ups, Jaime.

[MartinJQuinn]

Color of the depth charges here? They almost look metallic in color. The ones in the racks on the stern are even lighter color.

[Jamie Alguire]

Hey Martin:
Looking at color 'Benson' photos, these seems to be same color as ship ie. 5N blue in Laffey's case.
Im glad you asked, cause Ive been researching depth charge types, and am wondering what type of depth charge & launch rack Laffey would have carried?
Im guessing the earlier Mk3 type rack, for the larger Mk 6 DC?

[Rick E Davis]

We have had discussions about what paint depth charges were "painted with". It depends. I have seen so many variations I don't have a solid answer. Early war depth charges were painted with 5-D for awhile to match Ms 1. And "most" times, the crews tired to paint the depth charges according to the camo rules of the pattern their ship had applied. There are photos of destroyers headed to North Africa for Operation Torch where the crew went to the trouble to paint the "top" of depth charges "deck blue" and the lower half "5-H". Most times one paint was selected. When the Atlantic Fleet had Ms 22 as a standard, it appears most depth charges were paint in 5-H. In the Pacific Fleet while Ms 21 was the standard, it appears that 5-N was the standard. It seems that at some point depth charges were painted in a paint like 5-O at the manufacturer (since new depth charges on Atlantic ships were repainted to 5-H). See image below. They were suppose to be painted by the crew/shipyard to conform to camo rules of "the day".





So in the photos of USS LAFFEY, the ship probably was supplied with new depth charges (300-lb for the K-Guns and 600-lb for the Drop Tracks) painted as delivered, and no one bothered to repaint them. If they are "new supply" to the ship, the paint on them is fresh and may well appear more glossy than ones that have been riding around on the ship for a month. As with any ship's paint, the next day or week, this could have been remedied by the deck Chief. If you are lucky and have photos for the timeframe you are modeling your destroyer to, use your judgement.

As for the Drop Track used on the fantail for 600-lb depth charges, should be the standard Mk 3. All marks of drop tracks for 600-lb charges had the same basic design, the only difference was how many charges could be loaded on it.

[MartinJQuinn]

Thanks guys. To my un-trained eye, they look lighter than the ship, so I went with 5-O.

[KevinD]

Yes, THANKS Jamie, Rick and Martin for posting the photos you have!

[Jamie Alguire]

great discussion guys!
Moving right along on 1/350 Laffey, next question is the mast; specifically:
What is the structure at #1 in the attached image? Its different than on the DML Laffey kit.
I see that the fighting lights (the lower set, #2 on the image) are different on the DML Laffey kit; luckily GMM set has the solution, although I modified the DML ones, as I like the 3D look rather than PE.
Also, GMM has TBS, IFF & other tech stuff on their yardarm, but I dont see it on Laffey, does anybody see anything different? Maybe Laffey hadnt had these updates in Sept '42?

[Rick E Davis]

Your #1 is the platform that would be enlarged for the SG radar that wasn't available when USS LAFFEY was completed and went to the South Pacific. Sometimes the TBS antenna is mounted at the front of this platform. Also, it was used as a platform to work on the radar.

LAFFEY and other early destroyers lacked the "stovepipe" BL IFF antenna, etc at that stage of the war. There could be a TBS antenna on the backside of the mast or just too hard to see. The new built FLETCHER's and BENSON-GLEAVES units built/completed at the same timeframe (summer of 1942) as the FLETCHER's, did have SG radar, stovepipe BL IFF, etc., but LAFFEY was completed earlier (March-April). The stovepipe BL antenna was installed on ships with older radars, SC-1 and SA. The SC-2 (after the first few) came with an IFF antenna colocated atop the radar antenna.

Studying the photos is the only way to be sure of what that the configuration of that units was.

[Jamie Alguire]

Thx Rick , you figure its the empty SG platform ? That makes sense, since comparably, these units were designed with gun director tubs (ie on stern deckhouse) that were director-less in Laffeys case anyways. I suppose that the technology advanced so quickly that it was first come, first served during refits.
Studying photos, I see no evidence of any addition tech equip, so will leave my yardarm bare.

[Ian Roberts]

I concur that the yardarms are bare (the only items I can see are the blinker lights at the ends of the yards). The horizontal shape on the SG platform looks to me like the T-shaped base of the "66015" TBS antenna (the actual antenna is too thin to be visible in this shot). Like Rick said, I've seen several ships with this configuration -- that platform must have been an easy place to mount the TBS antenna.

[Rick E Davis]

Jamie,

Maybe this will help with understanding why we say the TBS antenna is "likely" located at the front of this platform. The TBS system was one of those required pieces of equipment for communication between units during combat operations. Attached are images of USS LAFFEY's sister USS WOODWORTH (DD-460) foremast with an arrow pointing to her TBS antenna in this location. Also, an image of the 66015 TBS Antenna shows just how small, or rather "THIN" this antenna was. It is difficult to spot at any distance. Yards for some destroyers in early 1942, installed the TBS Antenna out on the yardarm, while other yards used this "open" location since the SG radar wasn't yet available. It was relocated on SURVIVING units once the SG radar was available for installation.

Also, as an aside note. Once SG radar's were installed, the platform received a reinforcing brace to support the platform/SG radar antenna assembly, once it was realized it was needed.

[Jamie Alguire]

Great info, thx Rick & Ian. Agreed, its tough to see the TBS.

[USS Forrest DD-461]

Greetings to the forum - new member here:
Thank you for posting such informative data and useful discussions on the Benson/Gleaves class- its greatly appreciated. I am currently working on a deep-dive into my grandfather's ship, the USS Forrest DD-461 (later, DMS-24; he served on it from May1942 to Oct1945): I am interested in any and all data related to the ship - including its design, contracting, and build process, its operational history (including its squadron and division's: DesRon 10 with DesDiv 19 and DesDiv20), as well the history of any of its crew member's. Lately and in particular, I am trying to determine the configuration/alteration history of its machine guns: the 1.1inch/20mm Oerlikon/40mm Bofors weapon systems. For instance, when did the ship remove its 1.1" and receive its first set(s) of 40mm's? Which yard conducted the work? When and where on the ship were additional 20mm's added (if any)? I had heard a 7th 20mm may have been added by spring 1945 for the Okinawa campaign (as well as adding 50calibrer Browning's throughout various deck and rail spaces). I have access to Ancestry/Fold3 War Diary and other operational reports for the ship but the level of technical detail is lacking. Any comments, research advice, tips, and discussion are welcome and appreciated. Thank you.