Calling all Iowa-class (BB-61) fans

[BB62vet]

OH YEA!!!! So, what's my prize???? I was at least 75% right - just not the location.

Cash only, no gift cards thank you

Hank

And.....since that's part of the '80s ship, perhaps the musuem staff should look into getting it put back into working order and then getting it reinstalled on the stbd tub.

[Fliger747]

Mmmm, something to add to my Missouri!

[BB62vet]

I think there is 1 mounted on the port tub as can see some metal framework there.

There is only ONE of these in place (prior HINT given by BigJimSlade).

More than likely a retractable davit w/sky hook used as a Troll Washer; see Dunking Stool under Early American Puritan Historical Relics.

[bigjimslade]

It's the dropdown lights for the approach lighting system. When the ship was recommissioned in the 1980's, the approach path was diagonal. The dropdown lights were located at the starboard side. A diagonal approach was used because larger helicopters had to be at an angle to fit on the helipad.

The diagonal approach turned out to be difficult to use so it was changed to a centerline approach. The lineup lights were offset to starboard as were the dropdown lights (attached to the gun tub).

Large helicopters (e.g. CH-53) had to do a pedal turn before lowering to the helipad in order to fit.

The final configuration added diagonal lines indicating how much large helicopters had to turn before landing.

Both the original set of diagonal lineup lights and the offset centerline lineup lights remain.

[Fliger747]

That would be some challenging Helicopter flying, pedal turns are easy, except you are dealing with a ship underway plus wind and superstructure turbulence. The only good thing is it's government and not personal equipment. I flew with a lot of Navy plots and they were usually pretty good sticks.

[chuck]

can anyone point me to photo of the Iowa�s flag bridge during WWII?

[Timmy C]

The interior, or just the viewing ports visible from the exterior?

[chuck]

interior, the part outside the conning tower but behind the glass windows.

[Fliger747]

Not from that era, but I have taken a photo on Missouri inside the flag bridge which doesn't appear to be much if any changed.

Tom

[bigjimslade]

Description:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=339391

[Fliger747]

I thought I posted this yesterday, but it's not here!

Looks to be a pretty empty sunroom for the Admiral to sit in his chair. Currently on Mo the chair isn't there, maybe the Admiral took it with him. The entrance to his level of the conning tower and flag plot, just around the corner.

[bigjimslade]

I thought I posted this yesterday, but it's not here!

It's posted under new books.

[bigjimslade]

It's been dead here for a while so here's one I took at the bottom of USS New Jersey's chain locker. I felt like I was not going to get out with the reverse slope ladder. This is the starboard side looking aft. The port chain goes on the other side of the non-tight bulkhead.

The bitter end of the chain is attached to the aft bulkhead. However, the attachment would not withstand the pull of a chain dropping.

https://www.amazon.com/Visual-Tour-Batt ... 098998043X

[bigjimslade]

It's been dead here.

Here are a couple of renderings of a model of mine of the rangefinder hood. The model does not have any of the irregularities from casting that show up in the real things. However, let me point out some details that are not visible or overlooked.

A detail the is usually gotten wrong is the front and rear faces. For some reason they are usually depicted as being straight. In reality they bend so that the faces are normal to the turret centerline for a few inches. The openings in the armor are cut normal to the centerline so the body has to go in the same direction.

The insider faces of the mounting plate are not flat. I presume the did this to minimize the amount of smoothing that would have to be made to the soft area of the turret armor plate to make it easier to get the hoods to sit flush

[Jennings]

I haven�t been able to find a detailed review of the VF Iowa. From what I can see, it looks like they�ve done her in her main wartime appearance, before her early 1945 overhaul and update when she got the enclosed bridge structure. Does anyone know if they got her other 1943-44 details correct as well?

Also, I�m reading two different things about her MS32/1B camouflage. Some says 5N Navy Blue and 5L Light Gray, and other stuff says Dull Black and Light Gray. It�s virtually impossible to distinguish in b&w photos.

Any help appreciated!

[Tracy White]

I would be inclined to trust this site the most, but I may be biased as I worked with the site creator and know the time he put into trying to find answers.

[Dick J]

I can't remember where I read it, but somewhere I read that Iowa painted in the Navy blue and light gray scheme in the shipyard. Some of the edges were feathered, others were not. But later, she had her camo "refreshed" in the field using black and light gray, at which time none of the edges were feathered. If true, that would explain the discrepancies in the various descriptions, and give a way to tell which color in any given B&W photo.

[SeanF]

It's pretty clear that the feathered edges of Iowa's camo got squared off somewhere along the way (and the entire port midship section filled in with the darker color, too - see http://navsource.org/archives/01/061/016138a.jpg versus http://navsource.org/archives/01/061/016108.jpg) In some photos the dark color does look awfully dark, but looking closer you can contrast it with the mainmast, funnel openings, and main turret blast bags, which are starkly darker yet - so I'm completely sold on 5N. As for the lighter color being 5H or 5L, it's really hard to tell from photos. I'd always thought 5L, but the Dazzle website's findings of 5H being the officially specified color doesn't sit ill with me at all (but it's true that sometimes the color specified wasn't the one actually applied).
Speaking of the late '44 revision... I don't see any mention of it on the Dazzle site; only the original feathered edge version. Was a revised scheme actually prepared, or an order given... or was it a field mod, so to speak?
On the other hand, I'm not so sure about the deck scheme - never heard of a soft splotching pattern using 5H. I don't recall anything other than 5O being used on decks to break up the 20B. Not doubting that someone thought about trying it, but I kind of doubt it was actually done, since it's such a deviation from the norm; or if it was done I expect it got abandoned quickly and Iowa's deck reverted to all 20B. If anyone knows of a photo to prove this one, I'd be really impressed. It's impossible to discern anything on this count in all the shots I've seen of Iowa in her 1944 dazzle.

- Sean F.

[Rick E Davis]

I'm pretty sure USS IOWA (BB-61) dazzle camo used 5-N and that sometime between January and May 1944 her scheme pattern was altered based on these images. That is IF the dates can be trusted. The image along side USS CHARRETTE (DD-581) was taken on 27 May 1944, because I researched the War Diaries/Deck Logs to nail down when this boxing match and the destroyer was alongside.

Being a battleship with plenty of crewmen, painting to change or touch-up wasn't a problem.

This image is dated 24 January 1944, showing the "feathered" pattern.



Compare this onboard view dated July 1944. Note that the pattern on turret #2 is different.



This color image of USS IOWA and USS CHARRETTE taken on 27 May 1944, shows USS IOWA's dark color in her dazzle pattern as matching the Ms 21 5-N used on USS CHARRETTE and the tender alongside.



This onboard color image on a sunnier day, shows that USS IOWA has 5-N

[Jennings]

Thanks for the help folks! Much appreciated. Navy Blue it is!