Calling all Benson-class & Gleaves-class DD fans

[PeteM]

Pete,

I need to ask you a couple of questions. Are you looking for ships to model more or less out of the box from the Buchanan "45" kit? AND does that ship HAVE to be in Ms 22?

Yes Rick, that was my original intent. Although from your thorough response it has become apparent that that task is going to be far more difficult than I had originally imagined. As far as creating one of these ships, I have a little experience scratch building but don't know if I have the courage to go that way with a $50 kit. I also have the Laffey and Livermore kits and a kit bash would work as long as it's only a matter switching parts between kits so I wouldn't have to trash a whole kit just to get a couple of parts from it. I am personally not tied to any one particular ship, so that is not an issue. I wouldn't ask if I had the resources to do it myself, and it seems my photo interpreting skills leave much to be desired. I appreciate any help you can give in this matter, but don't go crazy, the only one that is going to look at my builds and know whether they're accurate or not in an area like this is me anyway.

[DrDull]

Hi Pete,

If one of your concerns is modeling the flat-front 02 bridge deckhouse face, I'd encourage you to try the modification yourself. As Rick says it isn't all that difficult - I did it for my model of USS Ellyson (DD-454) and my scratch-building experience was next to nothing. I could send you some photos if you're interested. While considering the same issues (which base kit to use) I've decided to go with the 1945 Buchanan (not that hard to find, by the way, including directly from Dragon) for my next attempt at Ellyson after her conversion to DMS-19.

Barry

[PeteM]

Hi Pete,

If one of your concerns is modeling the flat-front 02 bridge deckhouse face, I'd encourage you to try the modification yourself. As Rick says it isn't all that difficult - I did it for my model of USS Ellyson (DD-454) and my scratch-building experience was next to nothing. I could send you some photos if you're interested. While considering the same issues (which base kit to use) I've decided to go with the 1945 Buchanan (not that hard to find, by the way, including directly from Dragon) for my next attempt at Ellyson after her conversion to DMS-19.

Barry

Barry, I would appreciate seeing those photos. My E-mail address is pmm736@aol.com. Although posting them here might help out more people but that of course is up to you. As far as the '45 Buchanan kit goes, I bought two of them with the intention of building one and possibly selling the other in hopes that the anticipated rarity of a CyberHobby limited edition would drive up the secondary market price like some of their other kits.

[sixman]

Barry,

I agree, if you could post the pictures here it would help a lot of other modellers.

Pete,

As of this afternoon, you can still get the USS Buchanan 1945 version from DragonOnlieUSA for $39.99, so it will be a while for the secondary market to take off.

[PeteM]

Barry,

I agree, if you could post the pictures here it would help a lot of other modellers.

Pete,

As of this afternoon, you can still get the USS Buchanan 1945 version from DragonOnlieUSA for $39.99, so it will be a while for the secondary market to take off.

I know, another example of me being a day late and a dollar short.

[DrDull]

Pete - Maybe you're just way ahead of your time! I'll post a few pictures of my flat deckhouse face conversion later this evening. Barry

Barry,

I agree, if you could post the pictures here it would help a lot of other modellers.

Pete,

As of this afternoon, you can still get the USS Buchanan 1945 version from DragonOnlieUSA for $39.99, so it will be a while for the secondary market to take off.

I know, another example of me being a day late and a dollar short.

[DrDull]

To those interested in modifying the standard Dragon Buchanan to represent other Gleaves class ships that had the flat face deckhouse (behind the 52 mount) here is how I handled it. Beginning with kit part A9
I used a razor saw and trimmed off the rounded front .
I used a piece of 0.010 styrene for the flat front
and used bits of styrene and wire to add the ready ammunition locker and other details. .
You also have to shave a bit off the top of piece A8 to remove the rounded front of the mating deck surface. After painting and a bit of weathering (not yet flat coated) it looks like this
. Its really very simple. Rick posted a photo of Ellyson showing this feature back on page one of this topic.

I hope you give it a try. Barry

[PeteM]

Thanks a ton Barry. Your photos certainly reinforce Rick's (and your) assertion that its a pretty simple fix. I don't see any reason for not trying it. Doing so will certainly expand the number of subjects that fit my criteria.

I guess the next step is to locate photos of ships that show the area of the 40mm tubs. So far I've been unable to come across any.

[Rick E Davis]

Pete,

Here is a view of the "earlier" Mare Island Navy Yard style of the bridge 20-mm installation (these views on McCalla that would be very close to Buchanan, but I don't know about the Ms 22 scheme). Compare to the Buchanan kit for the later style Mare Island Navy Yard bridge wing 20-mm installation. There was a raised platform for a search light in this location (the navigation bridge that comes with the Laffey kit has this search light platform), and they "simply" extended it and installed the 20-mm gun with railing (many times it appears the railing was covered with canvas). Several of the Pacific coast built units (Bensons) and units transferred to the Pacific were modified with this type of early style. I suggest that you look through Navsource and DestroyerHistory.org photos of Benson-Gleaves units and when you find some possible candidates ... I'll see what photos I have for them.

The beauty of the DML kits and the variations seen with the dual-class, any kit-bashing between kits doesn't have to leave an unusable kit. Another destroyer can likely be found to build from the other parts.

[PeteM]

Thanks Rick. I did notice the difference in the bridge wing set up of McCalla's 20mm's, and thought it might make for an interesting variation to model. It is a possibility even though as far as I can tell she never wore Ms 22 (haven't seen any photos and Shipcamouflage.com doesn't list it). But then I do have a second '45 Buchanan that I can use to build one of those if I ever come across one. I have been looking tonight and came across the Knight DD-633 and Earle DD-635. I have photos of both in Ms 22 and both have had the late war mod as far as I can tell (the center line 20mm tub is there but I'm having difficulty making out details in the area of the 40mm tubs. I haven't had a chance yet to compare what I can see there to the Buchanan parts, but to me anyway they seem to be possibilities. Your thoughts?

[Rick E Davis]

Jabba,

Grayson was built with open mounts in the # 3 and # 4 (with five gun mounts) positions. In June-July 1941, the # 3 gun was removed and a half shield added to the # 4 (now # 3) position. In the June 1942 modifications seen at Mare Island Navy Yard, the half shield was removed. Then the half shield was re-installed during the next major upgrade in June 1943.

The first and second images show Grayson in the Ms 21 scheme that was common in late 1942 through 1943.

I don't have a good view of the half shield mount without the canvas cover looking down into it. Here are a few side views of an early open-mount and the best half-shield mount view without the canvas cover.

[Rick E Davis]

Pete,

Knight and Earle were built by Boston Navy Yard and there were differences. But, they can be made without too much trouble (in my opinion). The aft deckhouse arrangement on Earle (first image) was different from Buchanan, but revision involves a little cutting and adding sheet plastic bulwarks. It all depends on how much work you want to put in it. The bridge wing 20-mm guns on the Boston-built Gleaves units stayed within the navigation bridge bulwark ... appear to be mounted direct to the deck ... and the bulwark was cut down some. The second image shows the bridges of BOTH Knight and Earle (lucky they were both in this same photo) and you can see the minor differences.

[PeteM]

Rick, thanks for all your work and I apologize for pounding you with all these questions. Now I promise just one more for tonight. How much did the Emmons and Macomb, which were Bath Iron Works ships, differ from the Federals? They appear, to my eyes anyway, to be very similar to the '45 Buchanan after the late war refit (and before the DMS conversion, obviously).

And BTW, I think I've decided to take a shot at building McCalla as well after seeing the good photos of the bridge wing 20mm you posted. There's a lot of good stuff there, including flag bag detail and the mounting points for the foremast stays.

[DrDull]

Pete - I'm sure someone else will point you to it as well, but there is an excellent article by Alan Raven on building McCalla in Model Ship Builder. I'm not sure exactly how many issues the article spans, but I know the last part was published in Issue #28 (March/April 1984). I think first part appeared in Sept/Oct 1982 issue (#19). Barry

[Jabba]

to Rick - thanks a lot for your support. Your knowledge are realy excellent.

I guess Ms.21, but was little bit perplex by uneven line between two colors on the hull.

best regards

Jindrich Nepevny
Prague - Czech Republic

[Rick E Davis]

Pete,

Emmons and Macomb had some differences, the most noticeable being that these Boston-built destroyers were among the few repeat-Gleaves class units to have the searchlight mounted on the aft deckhouse. Most of the original batch of Benson-Gleaves (DD421-444) had the searchlight mounted there as well. The splinter bulwarks surrounding the twin 40-mm mounts, Mk 51 directors, and searchlight ... also resembles the configuration used on the early Benson-Gleaves units as well. Of course the front of the 02 deckhouse to the bridge was squared off. Here is a view of the Emmons on 1 November 1943 ... the latest view of her that I have scanned ... and would be about a year before she was converted to a DMS. Macomb looked pretty much the same.

[Rick E Davis]

Jindrich,

The "two-tone" you see on the Grayson are from the water wetting the lower surface. Even when the ship is sitting at rest, the water wear and time will show differences in the Navy Blue paint on a well used ship.

[PeteM]

Thanks Rick, I think I might be leaning towards doing one of these two ships. As Barry has shown, the flat 02 bridge level face is a pretty simple fix, and I think I can probably scratch build the aft deck house bulwarks without too much difficulty. The searchlight platform and railings look to be the same as the kit part but was the tower the same? And what exactly is going on just aft of the aft stack? Is there a deck there or is the funnel trunking exposed? What are the items located there in the Emmons photo and would they have been there under battle conditions? It also looks like that the K-gun depth charges are in racks. Or am I not seeing that right?

[Rick E Davis]

Pete,

I'll have to post views of the shelter deck aft of the second stack later. But, it appears in quick looks of photos I have that there is a deckhouse over the trunking, but has some differences in configuration of "stuff". Emmons may have the 5-in loader mounted there in November 1943. Earlier views show several ready service ammo lockers for the 20-mm guns on the deckhouse. It looks like these two were a couple of the ships that were being built to the specifications of the original group and they have the foundation for the aft TT mount which was never installed. Actually Aaron Ward and Buchanan were being built the same way (the last of Federal-built Gleaves units with the foundation), but the searchlight covers much of the evidence of the foundation. Most ships built in the repeat series had the foundation deleted during construction. It was kind of an interesting design, the foundation had to straddle the trunking area to transfer and support the weight.

One correction, Emmons and Macomb were built by Bath Iron Works not Boston Navy Yard.

Actually, these two ships are favorites for me as well. I have some views of them during Operation Torch while they still had the quad 1.1-in mount. Interesting ships that went on to be converted to DMS and then Macomb served overseas post-war for Japan and Taiwan.

[PeteM]

After closely examining the close up pic I think you're right. There is definitely a pair of lockers visible just aft of the stack. Is it possible that the practice loader is under the dark cover just aft of that? My other question regards the Mk 51 directors for the aft 40mm guns. Are they the dark objects directly forward of the 40mm's?