1/144 Jorge Juan (ex USS McGowan)

[Fliger747]

That's all you can do is research and come to your best conclusion! Interesting, I had never seen a mount Captain's hatch on the port side. For my Alaska I had an advantage that were were only three in the class (two completed) and they couldn't even get those the same let alone the predications of ship yard visits. I have the same problem with USS Randall, there was over 100 of these ships commissioned and some do and some don't.

Cheers: Tom

[Rick E Davis]

The 5-in/38 single gun mounts came in "lefties" and "righties" for the Gun Captain hatches/positions. The 5-in/38 guns were made in "left" and "right" configurations for installation in twin mounts. Because the USN didn't want to produce another configuration for the single mounts, used predominately on destroyers, you will find "lefties" and "righties" mounts installed on FLETCHER's. Something ship model kit makers don't produce. Some FLETCHER's had all "righties" and others all "lefties", while many had a mix. A particular destroyer could have one type exchanged with another type (but normally they tried to replace with the same type) when the original mount was destroyed in action or from hang-fires (something that happened more often than is realized).

Here is an overhead view of USS McGOWAN (DD-678) during her shakedown cruise. She has all "righties" and kept them into the 1950's (except for 53 mount, which was removed). (Note that 54 twin mount is missing due to a shortage of twin 40-mm mounts in early 1944)

So Willie you can relax.

USS STODDARD also had all "righties", so Hank you can relax as well.



Here is an image of USS AMMEN (DD-527), with all "lefties", as completed.



If I remember right, no pun intended, all of the 1/350 scale (heck all scales) kit makers and even 3-D printed and resin aftermarket makers only make "righties". I seem to remember that one maker, can't remember who, made 5-in/38 mounts with hatches on both sides.

Now then, when I build a FLETCHER kit, I decided it wasn't worth my trouble to modify the gun captain locations on the mounts to be totally accurate. I usually have a lot of other things that need to be modified, that this is minor (until the gun captain hoods started to be installed, it was really hard to see where the hatch was located, unless it was open. I guess on the 1/144 scale kits, it would be more noticeable and worth altering.

[Fliger747]

Thank you RED. interesting minor, but still interesting details! Thank you to Willie as well for having a well researched build to probe such question! As to the righties and lefties, reminds me of the old welshman who calls the vet when his mule died "He ain't never done that before"!

[BB62vet]

Willie, Rick, Tom -
Thanks for the info. That's (the mount cap'tns hood) one detail I simply didn't think of checking on - but, after reviewing my STODDARD photos, Rick you are correct - the 3 mounts with hoods are all "righties"!!! I can't verify the parts I have on hand (3D, Model Monkey), but later today will check those out as well when I'm in the shop.

As for the front opening in the mount housing (where the gun barrel protrudes from) - the kit parts are wrong - the opening is too wide and needs to be closed up somewhat. Once again, wondering why the kit mfgr's can't get these details correct - all of us seem to know what's right/wrong - I guess the quality control guy was taken out and shot at some point!!!

Willie - regarding your comments about the shell casing ejection door on the bottom of the mount - Yes, this was operated from inside the gun mount and the spent casing were ejected onto the deck below the mount.

Hope this helps - AND, thanks for the additional information that helps me!

Hank

[Willie]

Hi there Mr. Davis, Hank, Tom and all,

Mr. Davis, thanks for the excellent explanation that definitely clarifies an, as far as now, obscure subject.

As to the righties and lefties, reminds me of the old welshman who calls the vet when his mule died "He ain't never done that before"!

Tom, regarding righties and lefties, the thing can get really nasty. If you see the following picture, and notice the re-setting of the hatches on the same plate, the situation can get to the border line of a brain hemorrhage. Actually I almost got one, after realizing that many of the pictures I had been looking at were not simply reversed.

[/size]

(...) Regarding your comments about the shell casing ejection door on the bottom of the mount - Yes, this was operated from inside the gun mount and the spent casing were ejected onto the deck below the mount.

Hank, I was positive it was like this, but with the eye evidence from a Fletcher veteran, the thing is clear now.

Nice going, and very best regards from this side of the world,

Willie.

[Fliger747]

That's interesting about the plate filling in the Mt Captains hatch on the left! First thing I checked was indeed reversed photos, but the forward hatch is always a good clue, being port of centerline. "Ejected is perhaps a little too mechanical of a term, the cases, ejected from the breach were tossed by hand down the chute by the hot case man, wearing elbow length asbestos gloves.

I 3D printed a new set of blast hoods and Mt Captain's sights in 1:144 and sent the files to Hank. I printed some in 1:192 as well for the mounts on Missouri and Alaska. They printed OK, but you really need a microscope to see them. Perhaps beyond the point of diminishing returns.

Keep up the great work! Regards: Tom

[Fliger747]

I am reading Ian Toll's third book on the Pacific War. McGowan was mentioned as making torpedo runs against the Japanese Battleships in Surigao Straight. I don't know that any of her fish hit, but she was distracting enough that the destroyers on the other side did score.

Cheers: Tom

[JIM BAUMANN]

I just never cease to be astonished by the thirst for accuracy
AND
the depth of knowledge to be found here at MW.com

Most impressive on all counts!

JIM B

[Neptune]

Although not entirely my cup of tea, this topic (and yes, I do follow it regularly) is great!

As Jim mentioned, great to see this amount of knowledge available here!

[Willie]

Hi there folks,

Tom, the action off Surigao Straits was so impressive that this is the reason why I included some notes on the career of USS McGowan at the beginning of the thread. I have asked myself many times if I should have served on board this ship instead of the ship where I served, a modified Knox-class frigate. My ship was the spearhead of the Spanish navy at the time, but regarding historical interest, Jorge Juan was years light ahead of her.

And I do agree with Meister Baumann and Neptune: if a modeling forum is not for sharing, what is it for at all ???

As for the shell case disposal hatch, and after studying in depth a couple of pictures that Hank Strub had sent me some months ago, I think I have managed to find the most relevant info that can close the gap:

And even an overview shot !!!:

With this precious info on a really minor detail, I have been able to produce this results:

I have also added some missing details on the front structure, so the whole set is at the moment like this :

I hope you like it, and best regards from this side,

Willie.[/size]

[Fliger747]

Willie!

One of the interesting things here is continually learning new tidbits. That is a good view of the blast hood, a three rib version. Notice that it hangs over the side of the mount a bit. More unusually is the vertical LADDER on the back of the mount! Another item I hadn't seen.

The absolute high point in any Destroyer career, making a night torpedo run against a Battleship! How few did that and survived!

Cheers: Tom

[BB62vet]

Willie,
To help with your 5"/38 mount construction, here is a closeup of a larger photo I took of STODDARD the day we entered drydock in Sasebo, JN March 1967. I think this pretty well details the 5" gun mount fronts & port side of the mounts:

If you look at the side of the ship - notice the rusted round area with a steel bar? Well, that's the battle damage repair our ship's repair party made to the 4" NVN shell that went thru the hull, exploded and put us out of action for a couple hours. That patch lasted well enough to get us from the river inlet where we were hit back to Japan for emergency battle damage & other repairs.

Anyhow, I hope this is of some use in your mount construction. I'm fairly confident that Jorge Juan's mounts were of the same Mk/Mod as STODDARD's.

Hank

[Willie]

Howdy Hank and all,

Thanks for your interest and your follow-up. I feel honored having a Fletcher vet. tracking my steps.

(...) Here is a closeup of a larger photo I took of STODDARD the day we entered drydock in Sasebo, JN March 1967. I think this pretty well details the 5" gun mount fronts & port side of the mounts.

Thanks again for the excellent picture, no doubt part of your war memories. I have already downloaded it to my files. actually I have just noticed a couple of mistakes I have made that should be corrected.

I'm fairly confident that Jorge Juan's mounts were of the same Mk/Mod as STODDARD's.

Honestly, I am not that sure. At the present moment, I am only sure (and only to some extent) that McGowan/Jorge Juan had mounts 1 and 4 of the Mk.30/mod.30 type, and both with hood, and mounts 2 and 3 of the Mk.30/mod.18 type, both without hood, and all of them with a different case disposal hatch model.
I agree that probably the gun opening should also be modified, as it has already been discussed, but at this stage of the construction I don�t think it would be practical, and in any case I am confident that this potential mistake will be --literally-- covered by the blast bags.

Best regards from this side,

Willie.

[Fliger747]

Willie"

I think the fat part of the base of the barrels could be filed flat and some styrene added to the sides of the opening, then the now narrower blast bags will cover the modifications?

Hank's photos in dry dock reminded me a bit of the Escort Carrier Santee (built on tanker hull) at Leyte taking two Kamikaze's and a torpedo but surviving well. The funny part is they didn't even realize they had taken a torpedo, they thought the jolt was from dumping depth charges overboard to eliminate combustibles. Most ships at least notice a torpedo hit, those tankers were tough.

Keep up the good work! Tom

[Willie]

Hi there Tom and all,

I think the fat part of the base of the barrels could be filed flat and some styrene added to the sides of the opening, then the now narrower blast bags will cover the modifications?

Tom, I think this would be wasted effort because, as I say, the blast bags will cover the base of the barrels completely, and the side supports for the cloth will make the mistake even less apparent.

Hank's photos in dry dock reminded me a bit of the Escort Carrier Santee (built on tanker hull) at Leyte taking two Kamikaze's and a torpedo but surviving well. The funny part is they didn't even realize they had taken a torpedo, they thought the jolt was from dumping depth charges overboard to eliminate combustibles. Most ships at least notice a torpedo hit, those tankers were tough.

Thanks for this excellent piece of naval history. First time in my life that I know of such an event. To say that they were tough is to put it very mildly. I would better say they were like rocks !!!!!

While I was making the transom oil canning, and as I had to let the hull rest on the carpet because it is almost 80 cm. long, and I found no other position to handle it properly, I broke accidentally the very peak of the bows in one of the twists that I was making continually.

I cursed for a while at first, but I thought immediately that there was a good side in this accident, because the bows were not right at all: the stem line was slightly curved backwards at the top, and the bows deck profile was too sharp. The first mistake would be easy to mend, but had the accident not happened probably I would not have mended the second one.

The typical Fletcher-class bows and stem were like this:

The first thing was to cut the whole section in the kit, and replace it with a small piece of styrene, letting it dry for three days, just in case. Then I sanded it until it got the shape of the rest of the hull. Then I reduced the length of the bows sanding the stem 1.5 mm., with a wider profile at the top and carefully reducing the curve downwards to the waterline. This way I got the corrected profile I was trying to produce. It is not perfect, as I was worried of taking too much plastic away and making a hole in the stem, but is way better than before anyway.

Then I made the peak closed chock using a piece of 4.8x4.8 mm. Evergreen square strip, completing it with a thin canal all along the curve:

Even if not 100% perfect, as I say, the dry fitting seems IMO quite convincing:

I hope you like it, and best regards from Spain,

Willie.[/size]

[Fliger747]

Clever rebuild of the bow! I have also destroyed items during construction. Sometimes the re build gives us the opportunity to improve the quality of an item.

Regards! Tom

[Goodwood]

I've come across an interesting quartet of photo videos cataloguing a build of this same kit as USS Heermann:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jua98D73KUk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdgwlfvnIrk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qgzx5UkOuBc

And the final, showoff vid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A01gVfOgjlU

Dunno how much of this you can use, Willie, since you're so far along, but I'm certain others watching this great build would welcome some additional perspective on the kit.

[Willie]

Hi there Sean and all,

Thanks very much for these very interesting links.

I've come across an interesting quartet of photo videos cataloguing a build of this same kit as USS Heermann. (...) Dunno how much of this you can use, Willie, since you're so far along, but I'm certain others watching this great build would welcome some additional perspective on the kit.

As you say at this advanced stage of my construction and because this modeler is building a WWII Fletcher, most of the footage is of little help, but not of little interest. Some details --how to finish the decks, for example, or much small stuff-- are certainly of interest. Other than this, I think that this modeler is building OOB with lots of PE and some scratch built details added, and his movies show clearly the immense potential that this kit has. To see it finished is really a candy for the eye.

While reviewing some pics looking for details for the A-frames for the props, I realized that if most of the refitted Fletchers were given a modified rudder, and if USS McGowan was transferred to the Spanish Navy in 1960 after her own refit, the rudder should have been modified as well. The original WWII rudder was this, USS Wren in 1952 :

And this other picture shows same USS Wren in 1957, after her refit:

The previous picture shows that apparently the original rudder was not replaced, but simply extended fore and aft with additional plates to make the control surface bigger and improve maneuverability.

I was lucky enough to find two excellent pictures of Jorge Juan or perhaps her sister ship Alcal� Galiano at one of her overhauls at Cartagena shipyard, both them extremely useful. This is the first one:

The picture is not very clear, but it shows that the rudder had been modified in the same or in a very similar way, but also that, unlike USS Wren, the Spanish units had retained the three-bladed screws.

As I have no detailed idea of how Jorge Juan�s rudder was modified, I decided to follow the pattern of USS Wren, but inverting the elements, i.e., extending the horizontal part, and shortening the vertical strip. As I say, there is no evidence that I know of on how her rudder was modified, the difference is minimal, and it will give the larger strip additional support in case of accidents while building and painting. I have already broken the bow peak, and I don�t want to break my rudder if I can avoid it.
To extend the rudder was an exercise of patience, but very easy, to get the thickness of the original rudder�s, using only sandpaper:

The only tricky thing was to achieve the hydrodynamic profile, using again fine grain sandpaper. I think that more or less I have got it.

The rest of the job was simply adding a triangular structure fore, made with very thin yogurt container styrene, some stretched sprue to simulate the weldings (and cover small mistakes at the same time), and replacing the elements that I had to delete for my own rudder refit.

Once set in place the effect is quite realistic:

As the rudder is only dry-fitted the weight of the thing makes it to fall slightly backwards, but it sits well in place, and will be perfect when glued in the definitive position.

The only drawback is that the plastic I used for the triangle is so thin that the Tamiya liquid poly has melted it from the inside, and will need some additional putty and sandpaper. Ok, you cannot have everything together at the same time.

I hope you like it, and warmest regards fro m the North Atlantic,

Willie.[/size]

[Fliger747]

Nice job on the rudder Willie! The Fletcher's had the same somewhat bad tactical radius (about 850 yards) as Iowa's and Alaska's, though it was good in comparison to RN Battleships. I wonder what the improvement was? Certainly for their post war Anti Sub role the extra maneuverability would be handy.

Cheers: Tom

[Kometa]

This build is awesome, Willie. I was completely ignorant of so many interesting details about the ship.
Great job.