Calling all Iowa-class (BB-61) fans

[BB62vet]

Randy,

If you mean the new F.C. Platform, no - I used the center 40mm tubs from the kit and heavily modified them with sheet styrene to create the overall platform. No resin involved. If you mean the deck between the stbd and port tubs (the area I outlined in red), no - the after portion is only painted with deck gray and the fwd part is not yet painted. On second reading of your post I think what you're asking is about the entire lower level of the tub area - no, that's the kit parts without any work done at that time (it's different now - I hope to post something on my build next week).

It's amazing how when one is trying to create a piece of equipment or area on a model from photos and plans, without the complete picture it's almost impossible. This area was one of the less, shall we say, "interesting" parts of the ship and thus received very little photo attention during the time. Consequently, it's been a bear to create properly and this is why I've asked outside help for the deck area - there simply doesn't happen to be photo documentation of it nor as built plans that I know of at this time.

The Mk. 56 circular bases were also scratchbuilt - the directors themselves will also need to be created as there are not any at 1:200 scale on the market.

Hank

[Fliger747]

Hank:

Photo on p 209 Stillwell, NJ: Shows only racks for rafts on each side in the flat deck area behind stack 1. Two are along the rail and one on the front of the gun tub facing fwd (each side). There are vertical stiffness on the inside of the gun tub bulwarks. There are two stanchions supporting the aft end of the 04 level aft of the stack. Not able to tell if the w/t door still exists below the highest 40 mm gun tub.

Cheers: T

[BB62vet]

Thank, Tom!

I'll check that out when I get back to my shop. You know, maybe I need to get in touch w/Paul again - we served together in NEW JERSEY and it's possible he has more photos of areas of the ship that might prove useful.

Hank

[Fliger747]

Hank:

Found this on the Mk 57 director. A whole chapter on it's workings but not much for exterior photos. The cupola cover is shown via dashed lines to make the interior more visible.

Tom

Navpers 10798-A 26-E8

[Fliger747]

Hank:

This is the photo, in this case I copied it from Sumrall, Iowa Class...

Tom

[Russ2146]

MK56Director.jpg (5.46 KiB) Viewed 1734 times

[BB62vet]

Tom,

Thanks for the cleaned up photo from Sumrall - I have the original copy in the book but it is somewhat darker and yours enhances several details in the photo.

Russ - The Mk. 56 photo is appreciated, as well. I have the scaled drawing of this director from Warships Pictorial on USS SALEM (CA-139).

Hank

[RandyM]

Yet another TUBNUT question...

I am assuming that the decks of the two 40mm tubs on the fantail of WW2-era Missouri were the standard 20B Weather Deck Blue? The other tubs installed on the maindeck apparently had wood decks - or at least so says Pontos. The photos I have of this era don't really show this part of the ship very well...

Thanks as always,
Randy

[Fliger747]

I remember being aboard Missouri in the 60's when she was in the reserve fleet and was mostly in WWII configuration. All the tubs main deck and above essentially carried through a continuation of the wood deck with the exception that the tubs were welded to the deck and the appropriate margin trim strips added. When the tubs were removed at a later date strip planking was then continued fully through without a break. The ship currently has a welded/bolted plate on the stbd aft tub where the mount base ring was. This is not setup such that it would have ever been planked over. The drawings that I have access to do not show this area as planked (as always subject to error). The aerials of the era that I have seen have the mounts in place and are not of adequate quality to gain any info.

Most likely bare painted steel... maybe

Cheers: Tom

[stevegallacci]

Just got another Trumpeter Missouri (less than half MSRP, how could I resist) and want to do it as the Missouri in summer of '45 configuration. Dumb question, and as I'm lazy, so didn't go through all the previous traffic, how is the kit, out of the box for what it is suppose to be? I'll be getting the Pontos set 'cause I already know what the kit doesn't have in the obvious fiddly-bits. I'm also going to waterline it to avoid the worst of those sins. But is there some important features missing or mis-represented for her configuration?

[Fliger747]

Randy and jason would be the ones to know about this era. Randy has been doing a very detailed 3D virtual model of the ship, as well as some aft serious hull mods. Jason Channel modified his hull by a different method to good result. Hank Strub is doing New Jersey during the Vietnam era when he served aboard her. For your purposes reviewing the discussions revolving around Randy and Jason's ships would be invaluable. An obvious small but important set of hull mods, even for a waterline model are the rounded lip at the edge of the hull, the vertical butt plates between the STS hull plating midships and the overlapping of the hull plates where welded fore and aft. Also there is some possible inaccuracy with the fwd hawse pipe shape and the shield height of the aft most 40 mm gun tubs. Unfortunately my ship is (1)more or less not a kit (2) the ship in it's current configuration so while I have a lot of detail information, nearly none of it applies to a 1945 ship. Jim Slade and several others have experience building the ship in various scales and we have several members who have access to several of the museum ships which in many cases still quite useful.

Good Luck! Specific questions will usually receive really good responses from this great group. Note the 1:200 group build topic.

Regards: Tom

[Channell]

Just got another Trumpeter Missouri (less than half MSRP, how could I resist) and want to do it as the Missouri in summer of '45 configuration. Dumb question, and as I'm lazy, so didn't go through all the previous traffic, how is the kit, out of the box for what it is suppose to be? I'll be getting the Pontos set 'cause I already know what the kit doesn't have in the obvious fiddly-bits. I'm also going to waterline it to avoid the worst of those sins. But is there some important features missing or mis-represented for her configuration?

The hull accuracy (or lack thereof) has been beat to death on the forum but it's probably the most glaring issue. Above the waterline, the bow is a bit misshapen (too round and stubby from a top-down profile) and the hawsepipes leave a lot to be desired, but these issues are also easily fixed. If you waterline your hull the stern area hull profile will still be too vertical, but I doubt anyone except very obsessive Iowa class fans would notice.

I haven't found them all but I'm sure there are plenty of small detail issues for those who want to search them out, otherwise the general proportions of the superstructure are nicely done and match my hull plans well.

[stevegallacci]

Yeah, I was all too aware of the hull shape issues but want to largely dodge that with the waterline, as I want to do a "simple" build with minimal extra work beyond Pontos maddness. I'm still on my Spring of '43 Iowa and I'm "looking forward" to the hull fixes (resin back fill and belt-sander).

[Fliger747]

Steve:

I mentioned this in hank's build thread, there is an issue with the Trumpy deck dropping down around the base of the 5" mounts, the ship is not like this and the error is them not realizing that the profile drawings include a 3-4" coming around the deck edge, which does not continue at the mount bases. I will see if I can find some detail photos I have of this area.

Cheers: Tom

[BB62vet]

Tom,

I would certainly like to see some photos also. Perhaps you can give us all a post directed to this specific problem.

Hank

[Fliger747]

Hank:

I will see if I can come up with some more clear photos than those that I posted on your build thread. Trumpy got fooled by the coaming around the deck edge on the drawings, if you thought that the deck was level with the top of the coaming then it would appear that the deck drops down around the base of the 5" mounts. However as the coaming protrudes some 4" or so above the level of the wood, the steel underneath is all on one level. If I can't find a good illustration of this perhaps we can press the ever helpful cliffy into showing how this area is executed on the ship. Just as a guess the superstructure for the 01 level is too high, though not worth changing.

Cheers: Tom

[Fliger747]

Not perfect but two things to see here, notice the top of the ladder leading to the 02 level, one can pick out both the top of the ladder at steel level and the wood. Notice the coaming height and that the steel deck on top of the handling room is at the same level as the top of the ladder. Second thing to note, the 01 level signal gun area has no wood or coaming and is exactly at the same level as the top of the 53 mount handling room. The Pontos decking is correct, but the trench and drop down by Trumpy is not.

T

[Channell]

maybe these pics (USS Iowa) will help; basically there shouldn't be a deep trough between the deck and circular 5" bases.











I'll have to check my kit but it seems the gun mounts sit on a thicker circular joint with the superstructure than the kit portrays too... additional surgery may be required?

[BB62vet]

Being one of the true IOWA CLASS NUTS can be both good and bad: You suddenly awake with a Eureka moment and realize the syndrome even invades your sleep. Never mind the squalling cat wanting to be fed -

So, here it is: Regarding all the chatter about the deck levels around the 5" mounts - one thing we have all forgotten about is that the Pontos Detail Sets include a Waterway that goes around all these areas. At the very least, I think those waterways are also provided for the 5" mount bases. Since I'm away from my shop, perhaps Jason (Channell) can verify this for us. Those brass waterways may make up the difference that Tom has been alluding to, thereby solving this situation before it becomes larger.

I don't know why I didn't think of the waterways sooner, but in any event they must be taken into consideration before pneumatic jacks, cutting torches, and welding rods are put into play .

Hank

[Fliger747]

The issue here is that the top of the 5" handling room should not be below the level of the steel deck underlaying the adjoining deck, less the nominal thickness of the wood in the final instance. I looked at but did not take any detailed closeup photos of the area behind the mount base. The steel deck is just not covered with wood here, leaving about an 8" waterway parallel to the curved mount base. It does not drop down from the deck level.

Zo ( in my opinion) the deck and the area around the mount should be level prior to applying the Pontos deck.

Enough redundancy?

Cheers: Tom