Calling all USS Lexington CV-2 fans

[lvsquarerigger]

I did a sample test of the paints for the model and it seems to me that 5N and deck blue are pretty much the same. I was trying to figure out what would have to be painted before assembly and what could wait. Anybody have any experience of these two colors together? And am I right that they are pretty much the same?

James

[Jon C Ryckert]

I used Coloucoats 5-N and the 20-B deck paint about five years ago and if there was any difference, I could'nt tell.

[Tracy White]

I pulled out my Snyder & Short USN Page Chips set 2 and 5-N Navy Blue looks *just a touch* more blue to me.

[lvsquarerigger]

I used Coloucoats 5-N and the 20-B deck paint about five years ago and if there was any difference, I could'nt tell.

I have WEM paints and I did a test on the 5" platform, easy to do, and really didn't see any difference and just wondered if anyone else could as some of us can see more shades of color, women especially.

[MartinJQuinn]

To my eye, 20B looks darker than 5N, and Norfolk Flight Deck stain looks more "vibrant" and "bluer" than either color.

[Tracy White]

Deck stain is an interesting issue. How well can you match a stain with a paint chip?

[smithec]

Deck stain is an interesting issue. How well can you match a stain with a paint chip?

Because we are modelling at a reduced scale we should not be matching colours to original paint chips. The colour of paint needs to be scaled as well. There is some science around this, and when I have a bit of spare time I'll share it with you. But basically, the smaller the model the more the paint has to be lightened. For example, USN D5 dark grey is practically black on a chip. It doesn't work on a model 1:700 - 1:96. It has to be very light on a very small model, but not so light on a larger model.

More anon.

Chris

[Tracy White]

It does not need to be lightened. It needs to be "neutraled," if the modeler wants it. Colors go towards neutral tones with distance, not lighter.

[Jon C Ryckert]

If the paint has to be neutraled, do think that in the case of 5-D, that a person should mix in some neutral gray for scale effect?

[Tracy White]

I don't really like the term "has to" in this context; it's up to the modeler. And once you start mucking about with color, etc., you get into a larger question and skill set.

For basic toning down, a coat or two of clear flat will actually do quite nicely. Try it on a paint hack; put a piece of tape down over a couple of colors, flat-coat it, and compare the before and after by removing the tape. Since I do 1/350th I'm happy with that amount of "scale effect." At the same time though, I prefer to weather and I look at HOW the ships weathered. 5-D tended to chalk, so I use white oil paints to chalk it up a bit; the most recent work I can think of that I did that on is my USS Ward I did a while back for a former crew member. Not the best work or photos but you can see some of the streaking I did.

[lvsquarerigger]

Ok. Still working on the bridge structure and although I've made quite a bit of progress I'm again at a point where I'm scratchig my head, namely over the 5" firecontrol platform amd the mysterious radar that shows up after the refit at Pearl.

First the 5" platform.
Chris on his model put in a stepped up section at the front of the platform and it is very clear in the photo on pg 26/27as it steams by Ford Island on it's way to the shipyard. The step up and projection is very clear. Nothing that I can see shows up in the plans of the May '41 refit to account for this but in the photo it's plainly there. Anyone have any idea what purpose it serves and why it was done?

As for the radar, the pic on pgs 50/51 shows a radar mounted just under the 5" platform, tags it as FC radar, but there isn't a clear idea of what it's shape is. It seems to be similar in shape to the 8" rangefinder. I looked around at pics of the Saratoga hoping there would be a similar one mounted on her but no luck. I tried Googling WW II radars but didn't find anything there either. Any ideas or sources anyone?

James

[Dick J]

According to Steve Wiper's latest Lexington book, the antenna was the square version of the MK-3 (also known as "FC"). It can be seen on the MK-34 directors of the Helena in this photo: http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/050/0405006.jpg (The antenna on the high director.)

[lvsquarerigger]

According to Steve Wiper's latest Lexington book, the antenna was the square version of the MK-3 (also known as "FC"). It can be seen on the MK-34 directors of the Helena in this photo: http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/050/0405006.jpg (The antenna on the high director.)

Thanks. For whatever reason just now that link isn't responding, even if I just go to navsource.org. When I googled the radar itself it brings up a British one instead. I['ll try again tomorrow and see if it works then.

[smithec]

It does not need to be lightened. It needs to be "neutraled," if the modeler wants it. Colors go towards neutral tones with distance, not lighter.

Right, the theory goes like this. Just cast your eyes across any townscape, landscape or river scape. Or if you live near the coast or a port, look at the ships on the horizon and those near to you. The trees, buildings or ships in the distance will appear both paler and bluer than the same subjects closer to you. The distant objects are less saturated � they contain less red and yellow and therefore appear to be bluer and greyer. This is all caused by particles in the atmosphere. Furthermore, warm colours come to the fore, and cool colours recede. Artists and painters have exploited this phenomenon for centuries to give a sense of distance � also known as atmospheric perspective. Now let�s look at the science. We can use the same technique to deceive the viewer into believing that they are not looking at, say, a one foot long object from two feet away, but are looking at something 700 feet long from a quarter of a mile away. Simply adding white to the paint mix has the effect of not only lightening it, but de-saturating (making it more neutral) by reducing the warm tones. I have read in various places that the scientific formula goes something like this: take the scale denominator of the model, work out the square root, and use that number as the percentage of white to add. For a 1:700 scale model ?700 = 26.4. So add approximately 26 percent white. For a 1:350 scale model ?350 = 18.7. So add approximately 19 percent white. I do have to say that, while being an admirer of Tracey White�s work, I fundamentally disagree with him over his assertion that the paint does not need to be lightened. It was a long time ago now, but I was art school trained, and geometric and atmospheric perspective were subjects we studied in depth from the old masters, and practiced to get that illusion of distance in our paintings. It applies equally in model making.

[Tracy White]

Tracey

::sigh::

The problem with your science as posted is that you are trying to assign a fixed distance value to it. How far away does yor calculation represent?

By the way, I'll be splitting this out; I think to the camouflage section. It's a larger issue than just Lexington....

[smithec]

Tracey

::sigh::

The problem with your science as posted is that you are trying to assign a fixed distance value to it. How far away does yor calculation represent?

By the way, I'll be splitting this out; I think to the camouflage section. It's a larger issue than just Lexington....

Now that's a VERY good question! It's not my calculation, but David Griffiths' in his book Model Ships From Kits. Of course, the distance can be variable - eg. a 1:350 scale model viewed from two feet and a 1:700 scale model also viewed from two feet deserve different degrees of colour correction - more so for the small scale than the larger one. I'm not a mathematician, so I will leave it to others more celebrated in this discipline than me to work this out. And then there's the issue of atmospherics - in a cloudy, misty North Sea environment you would want more atmospheric perspective than in a crystal clear Pacific situation. As someone once said, science is when you are working with up to ten variables. After that you are dealing with art - intuition and instinct. Let the eye decide! And this is a GREAT debate to be having. LOL.

[Michael Vorrasi]

According to Steve Wiper's latest Lexington book, the antenna was the square version of the MK-3 (also known as "FC"). It can be seen on the MK-34 directors of the Helena in this photo: http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/050/0405006.jpg (The antenna on the high director.)

Hi Dick J. Was this the antenna we were trying to figure out some years back from that fuzzy CV-2 photo? Just wondering...
Mike

[Dick J]

Hi Dick J. Was this the antenna we were trying to figure out some years back from that fuzzy CV-2 photo? Just wondering...
Mike

Same one. It is still hard to make out in the "fuzzy photo".

[Jerry Phillips]

Mike, Dick....Tracy White also posted a document earlier in this CASF (generated by PHNY) that decribes the mounting/antenna of the the FC. It names the "mystery" antenna as a FC, w/ a 6'x6' array. Seems there is no doubt about this detail anymore.

Jerry

[Michael Vorrasi]

Mike, Dick....Tracy White also posted a document earlier in this CASF (generated by PHNY) that decribes the mounting/antenna of the the FC. It names the "mystery" antenna as a FC, w/ a 6'x6' array. Seems there is no doubt about this detail anymore.

Jerry

Yes, just a chuckle. Dick and I were puzzling about that one for a long while. Our other "project" antenna is the little squarish one that sits on Hornet CV-8's lower tripod platform during the time her SC was still up top, before CXAM moved there and put the SC on her mainmast after Midway. The little mystery one was gone after Midway. The same antenna sits on Yorktown CV-5's starboard forward funnel edge, visible in hi-rez versions of her PH arrival shot and the famous dry dock shot. Jerry, any thoughts on that one? Dick and I had been speculating that it might be a very early version of SA radar as a backup to the main air search set (SC and CXAM respectively on each ship). The fleet went to dual main air search sets on all large CV's right after Midway (save CV-3, who arrived right after Midway with two big sets in place already. Not sure about Wasp). My thinking is that these were small auxiliary air search sets before the decision was made to double up on the big sets.