Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

[Fir Na Tine]

Thanks Mike for your reply....I seen both those photos plus many more. I learned a long time ago never to assume anything when it comes to anything maritime. My my main concern is to get it right the first time and being this is such an historical moment I want to be as accurate as possible. Due to the high security during this transit of the Hornet and escorts I doubt I will find any photos from that morning.

Last night I had the opportunity to meet a retired Navy Captain as well as an old salt Chief who served on the USS San Francisco throughout WW2 including the Battle Of Guadalcanal. I asked both if there was any set order as to how a TF would deploy its screens when departing a harbor or bay such as San Francisco. They confirmed what I thought,there really isn't....to many variables.

In just about every artistic endeavor, some artistic license is necessary and it looks like that may have to be the case here.

This forum has been a wealth of information......Thanks You

Frank

[FRED BRANYAN]

Hello Frank

As you can see from the prior page I have been in touch with Bob Fish at the Hornet Museum. He tells me he is in touch with Mitscher's daughter and has access to Mitschers papers at the San Diego aviation museum. He has not been to either yet. I told him that CV8 photographer Bill Gibson told me in 2001 that Mitscher was a fanatic for photos and footage of the ship and launch/recovery operations. Considering the fact very little of that presumed collection has surfaced at NARA, I would suggest there is a fair chance the family has a good size collection in their possession. This espeically on the tail of the fact that the Jurika family obviously had USN photos in their possession. Bob asked me for photos of the ship in San Francisco prior to departure. I told him I had none and that I emailed a few of the local papers a few years ago with that request and of couse got no response. However in his status as a trustee of the museum I suggested he has more horsepower than a peon like me and perhaps he should rattle their cages again. I personnally find it very tough to believe that no one took a photo from the shore of the most unusual spectacle of a carrier sitting in the harbor with 16 B25s on it, especially the local papers. Whether they were permitted to publish them is another issue, as is the question do they still have them. This of course ignores the public, which also had the chance to take them. I do not know if Bob will attempt a public appeal if he tries the papers and gets nothing.

My point is, my guess is the photos might be out there somewhere. Finding them or getting papers to release them if they have them will be the problem. However with any luck in the next 3-6 months perhaps if Bob gets very lucky your problem might be solved.

Fred

[Fir Na Tine]

Thanks Fred, I have communicated with Bob via e-mail and he has been a tremendous help with weather conditions and time of day which is so very important to be portrayed accurately in the painting. Unfortunately I can't wait much longer because I want a the painting to be completed by April 2nd. I will most likely start the actual painting in a day or two.

BTW I think this will be the first painting I know of to feature the Hornet leaving San Francisco Bay with the Golden Gate Bridge in the background.

Thanks
Frank

[Fir Na Tine]

I forgot, I have one more question....Forgive my ignorance but what is the purpose for what appears to be a fence directly in front of the lead B25? Would this have been in place prior to departure or did it come later?

Frank

[FRED BRANYAN]

Hello Frank

I checked an after action report, weather at departure fog with about 1000' visibility. From that I suspect formation at departure was line astern, but perhaps a navy vet can help you with that. My guess is destroyers leading followed by cruisers then Hornet then perhaps a few DDs, but that is total guess work on my part.

The fence device is to break up incoming wind and spray. Due to low wind and fog at the time they left my guess is it would not be installed at departure.

Fred

[Fir Na Tine]

Thanks Fred, thats the info I got as well. I also heard Mitscher delayed departure till 1030 hrs. due to the heavy fog but by the time they reached the GG it was just starting to burn off. At least thats what I think I will try to portray, allowing for a nice lighting effect.

As for the fence, that was what I thought but wasn't sure. Now that I know, I would suspect it wasn't in place initially.

Frank

[Angeliccypher]

Okay wood deck versus Trumpeter's deck in 1/350. I am leaning towards not getting the wood deck, but wanted opinions of people who are both more experienced and knowledgeable than myself.

My thinking is that the wood deck on the ship was stained so dark that is looked more like it was painted than stained. AKA paint the plastic deck the stain color and call it a day not wasting the expense on the wood deck as the difference will not be noticeable once painted.

The reason this question popped up is because I was looking at Pontos' website and noticed their BB-63 deck is pre stained blue but looks really light. So which was more accurate for both the USN and CV-8 specifically? My statement about it being stained really dark and not noticeable, or what Pontos has done with the BB-63 deck.

As always, thanks in advance for entertaining my lack of knowledge.

[pbudzik]

Now that I've decided to scratch out the Enterprise, I was planning on drawing up the flight deck and having it printed out. I have a friend who does large scale digital imaging and we've run some tests. I can get lot finer and consistent lines out of his printer. On the right material, it looks great.

Paul

[Michael Vorrasi]

Okay wood deck versus Trumpeter's deck in 1/350. I am leaning towards not getting the wood deck, but wanted opinions of people who are both more experienced and knowledgeable than myself.

My thinking is that the wood deck on the ship was stained so dark that is looked more like it was painted than stained. AKA paint the plastic deck the stain color and call it a day not wasting the expense on the wood deck as the difference will not be noticeable once painted.

The reason this question popped up is because I was looking at Pontos' website and noticed their BB-63 deck is pre stained blue but looks really light. So which was more accurate for both the USN and CV-8 specifically? My statement about it being stained really dark and not noticeable, or what Pontos has done with the BB-63 deck.

As always, thanks in advance for entertaining my lack of knowledge.

Don't goo too dark. It was approximately the tone of USN aircraft Blue Gray on the F4F taking off. You can see the actual color here: http://shipcamouflage.com/specialtopics ... Decks.html, as there are good color films of her deck. The shot in my article on the USN Camo site is such a still frame. (Note, Enterprise is known to have been a bit darker looking, because of previous deck stain experiments. Similar color footage in the same F4F DVD confirms this as well.)


Same Wildcat as it clears the deck, visible just below the fuselage:

[Angeliccypher]

Fair enough. It does seem like this level of stain might be too light though:

http://pontosmodel.com/html/35002wd1.html

Thoughts?

[Michael Vorrasi]

Fair enough. It does seem like this level of stain might be too light though:

http://pontosmodel.com/html/35002wd1.html

Thoughts?

Oh yes, that color on the BB-63 deck is too light for Norfolk 250-N.

[Angeliccypher]

That is what I thought. So it sounds like I will be painting the 250-N on the plastic and calling it a day. Thanks Mike.

[Fir Na Tine]

I don't if this link has been shared yet but here it is anyway. http://www.britishpathe.com/video/ameri ... ft-carrier

Frank

[Angeliccypher]

Frank that is an awesome clip! I love the hanger views (for those of us nuts enough to attempt to open the hanger that is).

[Angeliccypher]

Thanks to photos provided by Fred to me, I spent several hours pouring over the photos versus the Gator mask and the Trumpeter painting guide. The color is not what I was looking at as I don't trust paint guides anyway. I was looking at the pattern. I wanted to get the M12 Modified correct on her. I was prepared to draw via computer a scale piece to create a mask out of if needed. Hearing Trumpeter had gotten it wrong I did the checking myself to verify.

Here are my findings. Trumpeter's paint diagram is correct to a high degree. At least this is accurate to 6/6/42 There are a few minor flaws, but not hugely noticeable unless you are rivet counting. The Gator mask is not correct.

The nice thing about the Gator mask is that you won't have to create a mask for it and it will still look decent. Just not right.

Using a piece of thread to run along the boot topping of the Trumpeter kit in 1/350 (without modifying the hull) then taking it off and measuring the thread in a straight line to get it accurate the length is 27 1/8". The length of the same area on the paint diagram is 8 5/8". If my math is correct it would need to be blown up to 316% if you wanted to use it as a mask. FedEX Office has said this is possible for them to do. I will find out today.

I do not know if Trumpeter changed their Painting and Marking Guide or not but the one in my hand matches every photo I have of CV-8.

I hope this helps someone.

Update: 316% is correct.

[Fir Na Tine]

Hello all...I just wanted you to know the painting I was working on of the Hornet is now completed and can be viewed by visiting my blog. I titled it "The Giant Has Awakened" http://walshstudios.blogspot.com/2012/0 ... kened.html

This tread was a major assist for in researching this painting...

Thanks
Frank

[Angeliccypher]

There appear to be a couple of platforms extending off the front port and starboard of the fo'csle deck. Can anyone who has the plans give me the measurements of those in 1/350? And how far back they are from the front? I can't find a good enough picture to calculate either of these.

Thanks in advance,

Gabriel

[Michael Vorrasi]

There appear to be a couple of platforms extending off the front port and starboard of the fo'csle deck. Can anyone who has the plans give me the measurements of those in 1/350? And how far back they are from the front? I can't find a good enough picture to calculate either of these.

Thanks in advance,

Gabriel

It sounds like you are referring to the little platforms that were rigged out for the anchor detail when the ship was in port. These were not left out when the ship was underway (for obvious reasons!) These shots should help, the first is a link as it won't reproduce here:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020827.jpg



Here is why they were not left rigged out at sea:

[Dan K]

I believe those are called leadsman platforms.

[Angeliccypher]

Yes those would be it. But since they are not extended out while at sea I will not need any measurements. Thanks guys!