Calling all Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) fans

Post by **ModelMonkey** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:10 pm

Some nice photos of USS Stetham DDG-63

http://www.news.navy.mil/management/pho ... 7R-169.jpg
http://www.news.navy.mil/management/pho ... 6B-003.jpg
http://www.news.navy.mil/management/pho ... 6B-018.jpg
http://www.news.navy.mil/management/pho ... 1W-002.jpg
_________________________________
(March 23, 2006) � The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72), Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) JDS Kirishima (DDG 174), guided-missile destroyer USS Stethem (DDG 63), JDS Hatakaze (DDG 171), and JDS Harusame (DDG 171) sail in formation during a passing exercise (PASSEX). Lincoln spent three days conducting exercises with JMDSF and took part in an officer exchange program as part of a passing exercise. Lincoln and Carrier Air Wing Two (CVW-2) are currently on a scheduled deployment to the Western Pacific. U.S. Navy photo by Photographer's Mate 3rd Class M. Jeremie Yoder (RELEASED)

http://www.news.navy.mil/management/pho ... 4Y-063.jpg

__________________________________
At sea aboard USS Stethem (DDG 63) � A Tactical Tomahawk Cruise Missile launches from the guided missile destroyer USS Stethem (DDG 63) during a live-warhead test. The missile traveled 760 nautical miles to successfully impact it�s intended target on San Clemente Island, part of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) test range in Southern California. The Tactical Tomahawk is the next generation of Tomahawk cruise missile, and adds the capability to reprogram the missile while in-flight to strike any of 15 preprogrammed alternate targets, or redirect the missile to any Global Positioning System (GPS) target coordinates. It also will be able to loiter over a target area for some hours, and with its on-board TV camera, will allow the war fighting commanders to assess battle damage of the target, and, if necessary redirect the missile to any other target. Launched from the Navy's forward-deployed ships and submarines, Tactical Tomahawk will provide a greater flexibility to the on-scene commander. Tactical Tomahawk is scheduled to join the fleet in 2004. U.S. Navy photo. (RELEASED)

http://www.news.navy.mil/management/pho ... 0X-001.jpg

Jeffcsr · Post by **Jeffcsr** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:48 pm

I was looking at Arleigh Burke Destroyers and wanted to learn what the differences are in the orignal & the newer Flight II and Flight IIA variants. I found in this quote from the following article :

The Navy also found that refitting a bulbous bow on a DDG-51 Class Destroyer results in tremendous fuel savings from reduced ship resistance. Although the original funding for this project was $3.4 million, savings for 50 ships in the DDG-51 Class are estimated at $200 million. The bulbous bow concept has been well received, and as a result of the great potential for cost savings, bow designs for future ships are being reexamined. The success of the bulbous bow retrofit has resulted in the Navy aggressively pursuing spin-off technologies with the potential for similar fuel savings.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... pgrade.htm

Is this different than the bows of the Spruance & Ticonderoga? The only dry dock pics I've seen of Arleigh Burkes all resemble the same sonar as the Sprucans & Ticos. Do the full hull kits available (Dragon, Trumpeter, etc.) show these Flight II & Flight IIA differences accurately?

FIREMAN IV · Post by **FIREMAN IV** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:52 pm

Flight I does not have a hanger to permantly keep helicopters on board. The flight II and IIA are the redesigns to make a hanger to be able to support i think 2 helos. there are other differences as well and they can be found here:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ddg-51.htm

I just started building the U.S.S. Cole and it doesn't have a hanger.It does have the bulbous bow. I have a dragon tico but i am at work and i can't go see if it has this bow or not but i think it might. I want to build the Churchill as well but I do not have the kit yet to see what the changes in the model are. I also plan to get the new warship pictorial on the burke class. I guess i need to post some pics of the build.

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:10 pm

Sean Hert · Post by **Sean Hert** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:43 pm

There's also;

1/350 Scale
DDG-51 Arleigh Burke: Marty Shay's Panda and Steve Brejnak's Panda
DDG-84 USS Bulkely: J.H. Kang's Panda
USS Mustin DDG-89: Dave Becker's Panda

1/700 Scale
DDG-54 Curtis Wilbur: Patrizio Carlucci's Revell Germany
USS Cole DDG-67: Jeff Herne's Skywave

Post by **ModelMonkey** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:35 pm

Tim Barron · Post by **Tim Barron** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:41 pm

I'm sad to say that I haven't touched my 1/700 Mustin, since the review.

But as Maxim pointed out it appears that the hangar deck is too long and the hangar bay too short..

Jeffcsr · Post by **Jeffcsr** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:09 am

Ouch! I would have never known...

So the Flight II kits are out of scale, how about the standard DDG51 ship kits?

blandcorporation · Post by **blandcorporation** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:35 am

The rest of the Flight I kits still have a too large helo deck, but it isnt as noticeable as on the flight IIAs. Really the issue is that the main deck extends further aft into the helo deck on the port side on the real ship. I would go to this pic to see the issue.

http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=31767

On the Skywave/Dragon kits, the starboard helo deck wall is in its right position, but the portside wall should extend 1/4 inch further aft.

http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/sh ... -54-03.jpg

Again, its much more minor than the Flight IIA and I'm not planning on fixing my Cole to be that way. I did, however repair my two IIAs by extending the hangar over the weekend. Wasnt too hard to do.

FIREMAN IV · Post by **FIREMAN IV** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:17 pm

hey Tracy,
just in case you wanted to know i sent you a IM on Oct 30th about making calling all ship fans thread for the burke. I did not create it cause i saw the USN destroyer thread and did not want to viloate thread rules.

I am building the USS Cole 1/350 by panda. I have stopped on it for the moment because i want to get the classic warship pictoral on it. I also have the flagship PE set to add to it.

now to go order "the book"

Tim Barron · Post by **Tim Barron** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:48 pm

Discovery Channel has an excellent one hour documentary called Destroyer Forged in Steel. It shows the construction of the Chafee, with all kinds of filming of the ship in dry dock, during sea trials, etc. I saw it in HD, and it was amazing...

Robin · Post by **Robin** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:11 am

Just let me add that I commissioned USS Paul Hamilton DDG 60 and I am a plankowner. Served 2 1/2 years on board as a Chief. So, I think I can be a good reference for allot of folks. Great class of ship to be on.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:12 am

I just saw an excerpt from a Janes article that the Burkes are having structural problems with their bows, and a program has been started to stiffen them. Anyone else hear this?

nick · Post by **nick** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 12:31 am

Since this is an Arleigh Burke class thread, I'm gonna put photos in it.
I'm in the process of scratchbuilding USS McCampbell DDG-85 in 1/350. I absolutely have no idea if I will use some photoetching or not.

As of this time I'm still drawing plans for the ship. As a kid, I don't know anything about scaling up plans but I only have here a 1/700 plan though.

This is going to be a VERY exciting build for me

Nick

bb-56 · Post by **bb-56** » Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:00 am

Q: How did Paul build a FLT I Cole out of a FLT II Mustin kit? I am interested in doing the same conversion.

nick · Post by **nick** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:07 am

Q: How did Paul build a FLT I Cole out of a FLT II Mustin kit? I am interested in doing the same conversion

That is interesting!
(I just hope Paul would see your question

!)

Well here is my progress of my McCampbell. I will be using leftover railings, and lots of copper wire. As what I had said, I don't have exact 1:350 plans so I'm not sure if the model is scaled to 1:350.

The hull is made of paper and is sprayed with red for flaws to be checked.

Next will be detailing the bow and stern.
(I got your PM Foeth. thanks though)

Post by **ModelMonkey** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:57 pm

Looking good, Nick!

Beautifully big 1/72 scale USS Winston Churchill:

http://wmunderway.8m.com/gallery52/gallery52.htm

nick · Post by **nick** » Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:58 am

Well, here is my progress.

The bridge is shown here:

More soon

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:13 pm

Anyone have any problems attaching the front deck of the Dragon Arleigh Burke kit?It doesn't seem to sit right the rear does but I already glued it once and removed it so I'm just wondering is it just me or is the hull warped?

nick · Post by **nick** » Sat Nov 10, 2007 12:37 am

Here is my progress so far...

As I haved observed, McCampbell doesn't have a CIWS and my dome arrangements are all wrong! This could result with some serious rebuilding.

Here are the other progress I have been doing yesterday

For me, the mast the most challenging, using lots of very tiny pieces of wire making the yardarms.
My modern scratchbuilt fleet with Mike Ashey's "Basics of Ship Modeling"

More next time

The Ship Model Forum

Calling all Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) fans

Calling all Arleigh Burke-class (DDG-51) fans

Calling all Arleigh Burke Class Fans!

r.e. Flight II hanger deck incorrect