Calling all USS Yorktown CV-5 fans

[TOMLABEL]

John, Dick, Devin and Mike just want to say thanks for all the info!

It's very helpful and useful information indeed!!

TOMLABEL

[John W.]

I had hoped someone had a copy of the hangar deck photo in Steve's book so it could be posted. I didn't scan it and post it because I don't know if that would be 'legal'. It looks like an archival photo, but I could not find it on-line. It would need to be in a relatively high-res to see the two cat tracks and so on. Can anyone help? Mikey?

[Michael Vorrasi]

I had hoped someone had a copy of the hangar deck photo in Steve's book so it could be posted. I didn't scan it and post it because I don't know if that would be 'legal'. It looks like an archival photo, but I could not find it on-line. It would need to be in a relatively high-res to see the two cat tracks and so on. Can anyone help? Mikey?

I know the photo, and have a copy on Ray's CD for Fleet Carriers 1922 to 1945 and also on his CD for the Yorktown Class. It is a USN photo, but has Ray's comments on it, so I can't post. If I find a clean copy, I'll post as it would then be public domain.

[Tracy White]

I didn't scan it and post it because I don't know if that would be 'legal'.

FYI, U.S. copyright law would allow for the posting of said photo under the "fair use" clause as this would fall under "quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work" or "reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; " If you post the source (title, author, page) a single photo is completely legal under these circumstances.

[John W.]

Tracy -
Thanks. Not sure how 'scholarly' this might be, but thanks for clearing it up. Don't want to shortsheet someone who took the time and resources to provide us knowledge.

So, the following picture is found on page 46 of Steve Wiper's "Warship Pictorial 9, YORKTOWN Class Carriers". Hopefully it is clear enough after compressing it to fit the rules for posting photos. If not, find a copy of Steve's book.

Highlighted features: Red arrow - paired cat tracks - they overlap about 80% of their length (WAG). Blue arrow - five gallon paint can referred to in my posting above. Green arrow - single cat track on the way out the roller curtain opening. Notice the step below the roller curtain - about 8" (a five gallon can high) - which shows that the top of the cat platform outside the curtain is the same height above the main deck as the step visible in the picture. In closeup pictures outside the ship, this step up can be seen. Yes, it is visible in 1/350th.

[Jon C Ryckert]

Ok, got another question and it concerns the platforms that stick out from the hull for the boat cranes on the main/hanger deck. I can make these out in the photo of Yorktown at Pearl for repairs and also in the picture of Yorktown taken from a distance off the starboard side during abandonment. It appears to be a semi circle shape but I do not see it in the HNSA plans for the main deck or starboard and port sides views. Any idea as to the actual shape and dimensions? Just wondering how much of a working circle overhung the hull.

Thanks, Jon

[Mike C]

I can't help with dimensions, but I found this image:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarch ... 4096757962

Looks more like a wedge shape with rounded point. Should be easy to make using near by objects for size.

HTH

[Tracy White]

Ok, got another question and it concerns the platforms that stick out from the hull for the boat cranes on the main/hanger deck.

Best I can pull out of a 600DPI scan:

80-G-21694.jpg (10.03 KiB) Viewed 1828 times

[Haijun watcher]

Please excuse my post if this topic has been covered before, but has anyone attempted to convert a Trumpeter 1/700 CV-8 Hornet kit to CV-5 Yorktown? How many alterations would have to be made?

Many, many alterations will be needed. As someone who is intimate with both ships, it is a conversion I would not look upon lightly. Have you looked into Tom's Modelworks CV-5 resin kit? Much less pain, albeit at a steeper price. They also have CV-6 and a resin correction hull for the Trumpy CV-8 kit. Given that Trumpy's basic hull is totally FUBAR-ed, That is the route to go in 1/700.

Hello Michael,

Would you please specify some of the major changes on the superstructure? I seem to recall someone here was doing that conversion using the Trumpeter kit on a drydock scratcbuilt from 2 Skywave destroyer drydocks, but can't seem to find that old thread.

The boxy forward part of the superstructure comes to mind.

Was the Hornet slightly larger/longer than her 2 sisters, or were their hulls exactly the same?

Thanks in advance for any feedback you can give.

[John W.]

Haijun -
HORNET was built in a hurry as war threatened, and so used YORKTOWN / ENTERPRISE drawings for most of the ship. Some changes were made in the years between when YKTN and ENT were completed and when HORNET was begun at the same shipyard. An unscientific estimate I have made is that based upon the approximate 20,000 tons of the ship class, HORNET differs from the other two in maybe 2500 of those tons - unfortunately for modelers, about 2,000 of those tons are very visible. Heck, HORNET differed from HORNET (as commissioned) by maybe 500 tons for that matter.
The differences are covered in detail in the three threads here on CASF, in the YORKTOWN CV-5 (this thread), ENTERPRISE CV-6, and HORNET CV_8 threads. (You'll see Michael's name a lot as well as others.)
So, given what I've said above, the three ships are nearly identical in key dimensions. They rode the same hulls until ENT was blistered after her two sisters had been sunk. The HORNET island is distinctly different in the forward end, being rounded at the pilothouse where the others have squared-off forward ends. HORNET had different directors for the 5" battery, and her 1.1" quad mounts were arranged differently.
As was the case with many large ships, these ships changed appearance over the course of their lives. HORNET had a number of very visible changes, for example, between her commissioning in October 1941 and her departure for the Pacific in Feb 1942, even including her camo scheme. So, in order to answer your question as completely as possible, it is necessary to specify a specific time frame for your question. For example, assuming you mean 'island' when you say 'superstructure', the answer to how many searchlights were installed on the island and the size of their platforms is different in Oct than it was in Feb. Same story with the other two ships as regarding changes - a date is needed to answer fully. There are lots of photos in those threads, and that should help you as well.

[Haijun watcher]

As was the case with many large ships, these ships changed appearance over the course of their lives. HORNET had a number of very visible changes, for example, between her commissioning in October 1941 and her departure for the Pacific in Feb 1942, even including her camo scheme. So, in order to answer your question as completely as possible, it is necessary to specify a specific time frame for your question. For example, assuming you mean 'island' when you say 'superstructure', the answer to how many searchlights were installed on the island and the size of their platforms is different in Oct than it was in Feb. Same story with the other two ships as regarding changes - a date is needed to answer fully. There are lots of photos in those threads, and that should help you as well.

John W.,

Thanks for your feedback and I am quite aware that all 3 ships had numerous changes throughout their careers and refits.

If you look at the past quotes embedded at my reply to Michael, you'll see that my questions about how I can convert a Trumpeter Hornet to a 1/700 Yorktown, preferably around the time of May or June 1942.

Just looking for a cheaper alternative than buying Tom's Modelworks 1/700 Yorktown- that'll only be a last resort. If a way can be found to do a conversion first, I'll do it.

[John W.]

Haijun -
I have posted extensively, mostly on the CV-8 thread, about my efforts to make something other than a tanker from the 1/350 Trump HORNET - including the ship for which the kit was whimsically named. I ended up scratchbuilding the hull, and now am well along scratchbuilding almost everything else. This is a years and years long project for me. I think the question you might ask yourself is what your time is worth. Considering the available options for sale (of which I am aware) in 1/700, in my opinion you'll be time and money ahead swallowing hard and buying Tom's kit. If you just want something that's somewhat close, or really like to scratchbuild everything, then by all means take the harder and longer route or maybe do the Tamiya mini-kit (since I hear it's undersize). I wish the Merit 1/350 YORKTOWN kit had come out ten years ago, then my own path would have been shorter for essentially the same thing I think you're doing. From what I've heard, the Trump 1/700 HORNET is an amazingly accurate copy of their 1/350th HORNET which, itself, is an amazing copy of, er, something. Your call.

[Dick J]

A brief list of the major changes would mostly relate to the island structure, but there are others as well. The confusion over differing lengths stems from Yorktown's original construction. She was designed with an after flightdeck configuration that was similar to that on Ranger, with the round down immediately aft of the 5" guns. In that configuration, she would have been 809' long - the length of the hull. But there was a designed-in contingency to extend the after end of the flightdeck. This contingency was implemented during construction and made the ship just a few inches short of 825'. But the revised length was not immediately released, so many of the contemporary sources list her as 809'. When Hornet was authorized, it was already known that the contingency would be included, so her published length was the 824'9" figure. So all three were the same length in reality, but apparently not "on paper". During the war, when 20MM guns were inset into the aft round down, the tubs extended beyond the original after end making the Hornet and Enterprise 827' long.

When it was decided to replace the 1.1" guns with quad 40MM, a direct replacement of the #3 mount (the high one aft of the island) would have interfered with the aircraft crane, so it was decided to relocate it to the starboard catwalk. Anticipating the change, Hornet was built with her 1.1's in the planned 40MM location, but only Enterprise actually carried the 40MM guns. The forward end of the flightdeck differed. On Yorktown and Enterprise, the forward end was tapered. But this allowed the wheels of catapulted aircraft to run off the edge of the deck on the outboard side, and so Hornet added small triangles of deck to keep the wheels on the deck all the way to the end. These triangles will need to be cut off in your conversion. All three were built with athwartships catapults in the forward hangar opening and the deck extensions in that area were designed to protect the cat. After Midway, Hornet and Enterprise both had the cats removed. So in converting a Hornet, you need to make sure that the catapult extensions are present.

Yorktown was designed with an armored conning station that wrapped around the front of the pilothouse, so her pilothouse was 1/2 level higher to allow it to see over the conning staion. The pilothouse itself had large windows which meant that the front of the pilothouse had a "faceted" appearance. Hornet deleted the armored conning station allowing the pilothouse to be lowered. Furthermore, she had portholes rather than large windows, allowing the front to be curved rather than faceted. Enterprise had her pilothouse modified to match Hornet's during her 1943 rebuild. Also the open bridges differed from one to the other. Hornet had MK-37 directors rather than the MK-33's of the earlier pair, so the foundation areas for the directors were very different. All three were built with two searchlights on either side of the stack, but Hornet and Enterprise were reduced to one per side. Yorktown was lost with all 4 searchlights on board. On Yorktown and Enterprise, there was a vertical inset on the front of the stack. Hornet had that filled in. And finally, all three were built with the same foretop to the tripod mast, but Yorktown and Enterprise had the lower level glassed in while Hornet never did. In fact, Hornet had her lower level cut off at the back making the tops look very different.

These are the major changes. There were also slight differences in 20MM placement (Yorktown retained her .50 cal guns to the end and added the 20MM, and so her gun layout was very different), 1.1" placement and a number of other detail differences. I hope this helps.

[Michael Vorrasi]

Hello Haijun Watcher,

I have been offline for a few days with a buggy computer. (Windows 8.1 sucks.)

John W. and Dick J. have already covered the many problems. IF the Trumpy 1/700 Hornet was even close to being an accurate Hornet, you would still have to scratch build most of the island structure and modify the flight deck at the bow, along with reworking all of the secondary AA batteries to get to CV-5. As the kit stands, most of it needs replacing (hull) or rebuilt just to produce an accurate Hornet, because they have so many minor errors in the Hornet island that need correction. To get the CV-5 island, even more needs replacing or alteration. At some point, one must realize that there is no reasonable way to do this as 90% of the kit needs replacing to built it to CV-5 and maybe 50% needs replacing just to build a reasonably accurate CV-8 from that kit. It is dimensionally correct as far as length and width go (and all three sisters were the same length and width), but that is about it.

IMHO, trying to convert the Trumpy 1/700 Hornet into Yorktown is a total wasted effort because the only major assembly that was close to the same is the hull, and Trumpy's hull is not worth the bullet to blow it off the planet. To fix the hull, you would need the Tom's corrected resin hull, then you need to more, or less, scratch build, or heavily modify the island, the forward flight deck (ok, this one is easy), most of the details and most of the AA batteries. The forward island pilot house and bridge work is totally different and the aft section of the island is also pretty different, as is the tripod tops. As John intimated, save up and by the Tom's full CV-5 kit, as there is no "on the cheap" way to accomplish what you want to do. Wish I could give you better news.

Michael

PS: IF you wanted to accept that it will be in 1/719 scale, the Tamiya Yorktown can be worked into a reasonably close CV-5 in that slightly smaller scale if you widen the island a bit and tune up some of the small details. But in 1/700 scale, the Toms Resin kit is the only real solution.

[Haijun watcher]

I already have the replacement hull from Tom's modelworks as well as the Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. The idea of possibly converting it to a 1/700 Yorktown has been an idea I've been tossing around for a while. I am actually starting to lean toward buying Tom's modelworks Yorktown though. Thanks again to all for your detailed feedback.

Hello Haijun Watcher,

I have been offline for a few days with a buggy computer. (Windows 8.1 sucks.)

John W. and Dick J. have already covered the many problems. IF the Trumpy 1/700 Hornet was even close to being an accurate Hornet, you would still have to scratch build most of the island structure and modify the flight deck at the bow, along with reworking all of the secondary AA batteries to get to CV-5. As the kit stands, most of it needs replacing (hull) or rebuilt just to produce an accurate Hornet, because they have so many minor errors in the Hornet island that need correction. To get the CV-5 island, even more needs replacing or alteration. At some point, one must realize that there is no reasonable way to do this as 90% of the kit needs replacing to built it to CV-5 and maybe 50% needs replacing just to build a reasonably accurate CV-8 from that kit. It is dimensionally correct as far as length and width go (and all three sisters were the same length and width), but that is about it.

IMHO, trying to convert the Trumpy 1/700 Hornet into Yorktown is a total wasted effort because the only major assembly that was close to the same is the hull, and Trumpy's hull is not worth the bullet to blow it off the planet. To fix the hull, you would need the Tom's corrected resin hull, then you need to more, or less, scratch build, or heavily modify the island, the forward flight deck (ok, this one is easy), most of the details and most of the AA batteries. The forward island pilot house and bridge work is totally different and the aft section of the island is also pretty different, as is the tripod tops. As John intimated, save up and by the Tom's full CV-5 kit, as there is no "on the cheap" way to accomplish what you want to do. Wish I could give you better news.

Michael

PS: IF you wanted to accept that it will be in 1/719 scale, the Tamiya Yorktown can be worked into a reasonably close CV-5 in that slightly smaller scale if you widen the island a bit and tune up some of the small details. But in 1/700 scale, the Toms Resin kit is the only real solution.

[Haijun watcher]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet, but for those modellers here who are into making a 1/350 Yorktown or Enterprise from a Trumpeter 1/350 Hornet, Nautilus models makes a conversion set with a Yorktown/Enterprise-type superstructure/island.

Nautilus models link: Yorktown/Enterprise conversion set for Trumpeter Hornet.

This bridge can be easily put on a Trumpeter Hornet.

If only Nautilus made this bridge/island superstructure in 1/700 scale. Hint. Hint.

[Tracy White]

I took at look at the 350th set when it first came out and thought it would be easier to scratch build a replacement than to fix all of the problems with the resin set. The gun tubs were incompletely cast, the catwalks were warped.... no thanks. Of course, that was, what.. ten years ago now? Perhaps their technique and product has improved.

[Devin]

I had the same experience as Tracy. But, as he says, that was 10 years ago.

[jabarry]

Holy Grail found!?

I stumbled across this picture after searching for years. I believe this to be a photo or still taken from a Bill Roy film that shows the forward part of the Yorktown's flight deck. If so this give us complete picture of her flight deck markings at Midway!

Note that this matches closely with my previous analysis I posted some time ago in the group. See posts starting around June 6 of 2012. It doesn't appear that the center line dashes appear to change their width though.

We know this photo can't be the Enterprise be she had outside dashes that went all the way to the bow. See second photo that shows Enterprise forward.

[Michael Vorrasi]

Holy Grail found!?

I stumbled across this picture after searching for years. I believe this to be a photo or still taken from a Bill Roy film that shows the forward part of the Yorktown's flight deck. If so this give us complete picture of her flight deck markings at Midway!

Note that this matches closely with my previous analysis I posted some time ago in the group. See posts starting around June 6 of 2012. It doesn't appear that the center line dashes appear to change their width though.

We know this photo can't be the Enterprise be she had outside dashes that went all the way to the bow. See second photo that shows Enterprise forward.

Well, I looked it over and I am satisfied that the second shot is actually Enterprise. Everything matches CV-6 lines and style of painting them. The first shot, therefore, has to be Yorktown at Midway because shape of forward flight deck rules out Hornet, the lines are different in their spacing, and no outer lines, the Wildcat has no red centers in the insignia, and the arresting wire pulled back behind the elevator is not secured in precisely the same way and exact position as CV-6, indicating it is not Enterprise and therefore MUST be Yorktown at Midway. Great find.