Calling all Fletcher-class (DD-445) fans

[pbrowne]

The Tamiya 1/350 kit has supports/cradles for the Whaleboats. From what I have seen I'm pretty sure the aft support didn't exist, but I think I've seen a small forward support above the fore/aft passageway bulkhead. Or did the whaleboat just hang freely without supports?

[pbrowne]

That's an interesting head-on view. Why would the whaleboats be outboard with the ship at speed?

[Rick E Davis]

Well yes and no that the ship's boats hung "freely". The boats in the stowed position had the aft end of the boat swung inboard behind the aft davit and then was secured with ropes and many times the front keel of the boat would rest on the passageway bulwark (it was open on the aft side, the Tamiya kit is in error enclosing it).

It was common "practice" in the South Pacific (Solomons) in late 1942 into 1943 to cruise with the boats deployed outboard and ready to be lowered. The reasons seem to be to respond to either the own ship being hit or to provide immediate assistance to another ship that was hit in a sudden air attack. During carrier escort missions, this wasn't as common of a practice unless the destroyer was the plane guard.

[pbrowne]

Thanks Rick, very informative as always! I'm doing USS Fletcher as she was in Purvis Bay in March 1943, the photos of which clearly show the whalers outboard, and in one photo the one of them launched and beside the ship. Have already opened the passageway doors

Cheers,

Peter

[scratchshipbuilder]

Of the three plastic 1/700 Fletchers, Tamiya, Skywave original, and Trumpeter, which has the correct transom shape? The Tamiya and Skywave look more flat and the Trumpeter is quite round.

Top to bottom Skywave, Trumpeter, Tamiya

[Alexey Loginov]

?

[scratchshipbuilder]

I guess the depth charges on the rear screw with my perspective.

[Rick E Davis]

The drawing is accurate for the shape of the fantail/stern of a FLETCHER, but there is NO known units with only TWO SINGLE 20-mm guns on the fantail as shown. Several FLETCHERS, notably the Anti-Kamikaze Modified units, had TWO TWIN 20-mm guns, but not singles.

Here is a view from a late 1960s unit without much of the WWII era clutter of depth charge tracks/stowage and smoke generators.

[Alexey Loginov]

Spanish destroyer "Lepanto" (ex DD 550).

[Rick E Davis]

LEPANTO {former USS CAPPS (DD-550)} was one of the Anti-Kamikaze Mod units. She received six Mk 24 twin 20-mm mounts. The 1957 photos of her I have prior to transfer clearly show that she had Mk 24 Twin 20-mm mounts still installed.

Perhaps a nit, but for accuracy the 20-mm guns should depict twin mounts.

A September 1945 view of the fantail area of USS CAPPS;

[hermannsae]

Does anybody know by any chance, where the fire fighting equipment is located ?
I am particular interested in the location of the 4', 10' and 12' applicators.
I would assume they are next to the fire hoses. Is this assumption correct?

[Andi@Germany]

Hello folks,

I read the thread about the 'false' Trumpeter HMS Hood funnels.

So, what is visible from the bird view in the Fletcher Class funnels ? The RoG ones are empty .

cheers Andy

[ModelMonkey]

There has been some discussion about the interior of Fletcher funnels in the past. If I remember correctly, there was no consensus on the appearance or configuration of the actual funnel interior other than to say that the funnels are much more complex structurally than just an open pipe.

They contain intake trunks, vents and uptakes, and a steam pipe all housed within or on the funnel. Hopefully, Fletcher experts and former crewmen will shed more light on the actual funnel interior, or at least the appearance of the uptake exhausts within the funnel cap.

Years ago, Fine Art Models took a stab at the uptake exhausts within the funnel cap for their very large scale Fletcher models. But, their interpretation met with mixed opinions here.

[MartinJQuinn]

I've moved Willie's work in progress posts here: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=163082

Just a reminder folks, we try and keep these CASF threads questions and information about the real subjects. You can always post a link to new updates here, but works in progress and subsequent updates should be posted over in the Picture Post forum.

[Admiral John Byng]

I hope it is OK to post this question here. I confess I have not read all the 86 pages of this thread.

I just got the two Classic Warships books on the Fletchers. Great books as usual! Are the gun mounts numbered 51,52,53,54,55?

I ask because it seemed like they are in the Square Bridge book (although I have only seen captions for 51,52,53 not for the two after guns) but in the Round Bridge book there is a two page photo which shows 51,52,52,52,52.

So are there three different types of mount 51, 52 and 53 and some ships had more of one type than the other or is it just a typo in the book as I suspect?

[Rick E Davis]

Yes the 5-in gun mounts were numbered 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55 fore to aft. The three extra "52" mounts was a self proclaimed typo by the editor from copy/paste without correcting the last digit.

There were several mods of 5-in mounts installed on FLETCHERS. The two mounts under superimposed 5-in mounts had a double-knuckle roof to the housing for greater strength from over-blast.

The 40-mm gun mounts were 41, 42, etc.

The 20-mm gun mounts were 21, 22, 23, etc.

Since there was only one quad 1.1-in mount on just three FLETCHERS, I have never seen any "mount number" assignment for it.

[Admiral John Byng]

Yes the 5-in gun mounts were numbered 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55 fore to aft. The three extra "52" mounts was a self proclaimed typo by the editor from copy/paste without correcting the last digit.

There were several mods of 5-in mounts installed on FLETCHERS. The two mounts under superimposed 5-in mounts had a double-knuckle roof to the housing for greater strength from over-blast.

The 40-mm gun mounts were 41, 42, etc.

The 20-mm gun mounts were 21, 22, 23, etc.

Since there was only one quad 1.1-in mount on just three FLETCHERS, I have never seen any "mount number" assignment for it.

Thanks Rick. I have ordered the two types of gun mounts from Model Monkey via Shapeways. These books are really great, I love the detail in the photos!

[ModelMonkey]

Thanks for your patronage, Admiral!

Although I like to use the terms "heavyweight" and "lightweight" (for simplistic marketing purposes for customers world-wide - those terms translate better into other languages), the mounts are more properly referred to as "double knuckle" and "single knuckle" at least during wartime. Rick could say with more certainty.

But the photos below may help show what was what for the 5" mounts and the torpedo mounts during WWII.

Lightweight = single knuckle
Heavyweight = double knuckle

[Rick E Davis]

I have a heartburn with using "lightweight" in this context. The USN in an effort to save weight introduced 5-in gun mount shields for destroyers that were made with lighter gage steel. They offered less protection to the gun crews, but allowed for more armament of other sizes to be installed.

I think the USN simply referred to the two different types of gun mounts by their Mod numbers. There were a large number of Gun Mount Mod numbers installed (I made an effort to list ALL of them that I could find for the SQUARE-BRIDGE units in the Square-Bridge book - something like two dozen without looking and counting ) on FLETCHERS. A new Mod number was assigned to new production mounts as improvements were made to the total 5-in/38cal mount. Many units had a mount replaced when there was a hang-fire or other breakdown. Mounts with the right-side gun captains hatch and those with left-side gun captains hatch had different Mod numbers. So a given FLETCHER could have FOUR or FIVE different Mods of mounts installed by the end of the war.

In reality for modelers, the different Mod numbered mounts don't mean much. The only visual differences are the single and double knuckle and whether they were early or later "lightweight" shields.

[Stephen Allen]

Hello all

I am building Revell's 1/144 Fletcher (as Fletcher but in the 5-N scheme as carried in the South Pacific in early '43) and i am puzzled about the right way to depict a couple of details. Firstly the non-slip walkways, which are the early continuous type. Would these be a different colour to the 20-B deck as inferred in the kit instructions, or would they be made using the method suggested in the relevant ships pub, varnish, sand and a couple of coats of deck blue over the top? There is a tonal contrast in photos, but the few colour photos i have seen are difficult to interpret and it could just be the rougher texture of the non-slip. These are not the individual stick on treads used on other units/later in the war.

Secondly, the main deck safety netting. I am assuming this was a natural rope fibre rather than the wire rope of the safety lines, but would it be a lightish colour or a deeper brown? I've got all the usual references (including Rick Davis' excellent photo essay on the round bridge units) but if there is something a member or members could add that would be appreciated.

Cheers

Steve