Subject SMML16/12/99VOL761 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 00:27:05 +1100 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: HMAS Adelaide 2: Modern RN photos 3: Drydocks... 4: New books from Poland 5: Re: CW Indianapolis 6: Letraset Dry Transfer lettering 7: Garibaldi 8: Re: German "cruiser" Bremen. 9: ADELAIDE'S PAINTWORK 10: ESSEX LENGTHS 11: Humor 12: Re: "Eilboot"? 13: A few questions. 14: Help on translation material, please 15: Re: Lindberg USS Yorktown/Boxer 16: Problems with Hotmail? 17: Gakken Yamato book 18: Re: Enterprise lighting in the hangar deck 19: Re: "Eilboot"? 20: Re: E-Boats 21: USS Massachusetts 22: Re: Gato/Balo plan book 23: Revell Flower Class Corvette 24: Re: HMAS Adelaide Camouflage 25: Bremen Incident, HMS Swiftsure, E-Boats 26: Re: Lindberg Yorktown CV-10 27: 54 mm Scale?? 28: Re: Lindberg 1/900 U.S.S. Antietam 29: Re: Long-Short Essexes -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: Shane Subject: Re: HMAS Adelaide >> I am trying to find out how this cruiser was painted between Sept. 1939 and mid 1942, prior to her wartime refit. Was the ship grey all over, or did she have any camouflage during that time? If the latter, can anyone provide photos or drawings of the scheme. The only photos I have seen show her in over all light grey during that period. << Hi Paul, Damm, I knew I forgot to chase up something before last night's SMML went out :-(. I've checked my refs & come up with the following: Australian & New Zealand Warships by Ross Gillett shows her in what appears to be two tone grey, but that could just be shadows on the funnels, in May 1941 Cruisers of WW2 by Micheal Whitley suugests that the picture there of her in dazzle, is in 1942 All my other refs, suggest overall light grey up to mid to late 42. Check out the AWM photograhic database at: http://www.awm.gov.au/awm_search/photo.asp Regards, Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) >From Mike Subject: Modern RN photos Hi all, Been digging through my old photos & came across a pile from Portsmouth from a few years back. Is anyone interested in a set going into PicPost, including various modern RN ships (Ark Royal IV, 'Vince, Fearless, misc frigates & destroyers) as well as various models from Flagship Portsmouth? Also, may be taking some imagery of the 1:1 model of the Golden Hinde and the Cutty Sark - anyone building them? May be added to PicPost a la the Belfast series. Mike Hi Mike, Sounds good to me. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Ralph & Karen Batykefer" Subject: Drydocks... Anyone have information, drawings, photos of a AFDM drydock??? Ralph -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: Damian Pliszka Subject: New books from Poland Hi all, There are new books from Profile Morskie series: No.19: French light cruisers Georges Leygues & Marseillaise (interesting zebra stripe camouflage) No.20: British minelayer HMS Ariadne & HMS Abdiel. AJ Press announces new monograph (2 parts) with DKM Tirpitz. In first part there will be 4 (four) sheets of A0 plans in 1:100, 1:200, 1:400, many photos, camouflage schemes (some of them unknown)... Well, question is when it will be released. Damian Pliszka Slupsk, Poland looking for new jokes :) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: SHIPMDLR@aol.com Subject: Re: CW Indianapolis I wouldn't recommend the 1/350 Indianapolis to a novice or beginner to resin ships. Steve tells me this is one of his earlier kits and it shows the farther you get into it. While it is very well cast, there is a fair amount of scratchbuilding involved. The biggest scratchbuilding chore is the large tripod mast. Another problem with the kit are the instructions. They are not very complete. Mostly absent from the instructions is placement of the photo etch parts. Most of the rails are obviously custom designed for specific areas on the model, but there is no mention where all these rails go. Many other photo etch parts aren't called out for placement either. I'm not trashing the kit. It builds into a very nice model. Just be prepared for more scratchbuilding than usual. The instruction problems are why I would recommend it to more advanced modelers. I'm hoping Steve will bring this kit up to the level of the USS Salem kit. NOW THAT'S A MODEL! Rusty White Flagship Models Inc. http://www.okclive.com/flagship/ "Yeah I want Cheesy Poofs" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: John_Impenna@hyperion.com Subject: Letraset Dry Transfer lettering Hi All, Does anyone know of a source for Letraset Dry Transfer lettering? Any help is appreceiated, John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: Pieter Cornelissen Subject: Garibaldi I have bought a Delphis 1/700 Garibaldi (the aircraft carrier, not the cruiser) without instructions at the dutch nationals. I have been unable to contact the vendor who sold it there and the instructions in the review on Warship seem incomplete (and the model has changed somewhat). Could anyone please scan the instructions for me? Pieter Cornelissen -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "J. London" Subject: Re: German "cruiser" Bremen. The Bremen that the British submarine refrained from attacking in 1939 was not a warship but the luxury liner and pride of the German merchant navy. She was heading back to Germany from New York by way of Murmansk and the Norwegian coast while a large number of British warships had been deployed to intercept. On December 12th she was sighted by the British submarine Salmon in the area of the Heligoland Bight. The submarine surfaced and attempted to stop the German ship but was forced to dive when a German Do 18 flying boat appeared. The sub did not fire any torpedoes as the target was a civilian ship and under the rules of war, so soon to be ignored by both sides, could not be attacked until the crew and passengers were safely removed. The Salmon, however, did torpedo two German cruisers the next day, hitting both Leipzig and Nürnberg with the same salvo. Both cruisers were badly damaged. The next day the submarine Ursula sights the damaged Nürnberg and attempts to torpedo her but instead sinks the escort ship F9 which has the misfortune to get in the way. Mike London -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Dave Baker Subject: ADELAIDE'S PAINTWORK For Paul Jacobs: Ross Gillett's encyclopedic AUSTRALIAN and NEW ZEALAND WARSHIPS, 1915-1945, has a My 1941, port-bow photo of ADELAIDE on pg. 85. Black and white photo, of course, but it appears to show the ship to be in a uniform light gray color but with what might be a darker shade applied to the forward edges of the three stacks, starting about eight feet below the tops and curving to a line parallel to the angle of the stacks. It's a full-page photo. If you are modelling the ship, you might want to obtain a copy of the book, as it also has an excellent broadside profile drawing by Webb (done from official plans) of the ship as she appeared in March 1939 with three 4-in AA aft, and there are three sketch plan-views showing armament distribution in 1922,1939, and 1945. The book was published by Doubleday, Australia, in 1983. Gillett has published numerous books and pamphlets about the RAN and RNZN, and they are pretty uniformly excellent. Rgds/Dave Baker Hi gang, FWIW, I heartily second Dave's opinion on Ross's book & his work in general. It's very well done. That & Dave expressed better, the photo I mentioned above - aw well, will have to brush up on my writing skills ;-). Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Dave Baker Subject: ESSEX LENGTHS Anyone seeking to learn the whys and wherefores of the design of the ESSEX-class carriers, as well as characteristics data and dimensions, would be well advised to look at Dr. Norman Friedman's U.S. NAVY AIRCRAFT CARRIERS (U.S. Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD., 1983). It's also got numerous photos and some fairly adequate line drawings that might help. Unlike the authors of some of the widely-distributed (and atrociously edited) pamphlets sold in hobby shops, Friedman actually did original--and very extensive--research in USN records. Turns out that ships are indeed hollow. Rgds/Dave Baker -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: "Kelvin Mok" Subject: Humor >> I thought this was worth sharing, even though I have three cats that keep me company. << Its Christmastime. Here's is another one. Our regional manager in Singapore lived in a house with his wife, ten year old son Timmy, his four year old sister, a baby and Timmy's puppy "Rover". Opening scene: Picture a blissful domestic scene with mom preparing dinner just before dad comes home from the plant. A house's with a back chainlink fence covered by a thick row of Hibiscus shrubs. Rover just wouldn't stop yapping at something in the shrubs. Timmy from inside the house shouts to Rover to shut up. Very soon the yaps turned to whining and no amount of swearing and threats at the puppy would get it to stop or get back into the house. Annoyed Timmy went into the back porch to see why Rover, whose head was hidden by the shrub, was making so much noise. As soon as he parted the shrubs a pair of the most evil eyes stared right back at Timmy. A humongous python had already swallowed half of Rover's head. Desperate he grabbed the only handy thing near by, a wooden broom handle, held onto Rover's left hind leg so that the snake couldn't swallow the puppy further, and started whacking the snake's head to make it let go. Didn't make the slightest impression on the snake. Timmy yelled for his mother to help. Mom, already hard pressed preparing dinner while caring for a colicky baby wasn't in any mood for Timmy and his dog, yelled right back to Timmy to cut out that crap. Little sis chimed in her bit which naturally led baby to bawl out. Puppy+Timmy+Mom+sis+baby = one neighbourhood rousing chorus which promptly brought out neighbour Mr. Tan to see what the hell it was all about. And the first thing he saw was Timmy holding the puppy's leg and beating it over the head with a broom handle. Mr. Tan adds to the uproar, "Hey Timmy. Stop that or I shall call the police." By then I was laughing so hard I hardly registered the rest of the details. Anyway Mr. Tan came over, saw what was happening. A bigger uproar but eventually someone took a ditch digging tool to chop off the python's head. Rover survived but nothing would ever persuade it to go beyond the back porch door again. When they stretched the python across the front avenue it laid across one and a half lanes. Timmy's heroics appeared in the local papers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: Ernst-Bernhard Kayser Subject: Re: "Eilboot"? >> With the suggestion that the E in E-boat stood for Eil ("eel"), I would venture hat this would refer to the German slang for torpedoes. The German sailors called the "eels" much like the US sailors referred to them as "fish." "Eilboat" would be a logical nick-name. Any German coastal veterans out there that can help with this? << I am too young to be WWII veteran, let alone a coastal one. I am not even very much interested in Kriegsmarine subjects but I have read and heard a thing or two about it. Besides I am a German native speeker. Thus, I know what I am talking about when it comes to German terms. Let's see whether we can clarify some of the terms in this thread: 1) "S-Boot" is short for "Schnellboot", which is a small coastal vessel, a motor torpedo boat. The British called it "E-boat" for god-knows what reason. 2) "T-Boot" is short for "Torpedoboot", a larger vessel, about the size of a corvette or tiny destroyer. I don't know whether there is a more specific term than "torpedo boat" in English. 3) "Aal" German for "eel" (the fish) or Kriegsmarine slang for torpedo. 4) "E-Boot" is a class of yachts for sailing competitions. I have never heard the German term in any other context. 4) "Eil..." means "express..." as in "Eildampfer", an "express steamer". I never came across the term "Eilboot" In my humble opinion an "Eilboot" did never exist in the Kriegsmarine (experts correct me if I am wrong). The whole confusion stems from difficulties in the translations. How do you translate "S-Boot"? I am sure, in most translations it becomes an "E-boat" wile in some it becomes an "S-boat". The first translation is correct but counterintuitive, the latter sounds OK but will almost certainly be confused with "submarine", especially when presented out of context. Bernhard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "Ralph Koziarski" Subject: A few questions. I guess these all concern PE in a way... First; I see all these posts about PE sailors. Are these available in the smaller scales? like 1/600 and 1/700? I've gone through all the hobby shops I know of in this area (SE Wisconsin) and nobody seems to know what it is I want. Which leads me to my second question, any of you SMMLies living in this neck of the woods, can you recomend a hobby shop thats well stocked for ship modelers? I'm getting tired of having to drive down to Wheeling Il, just to get some bloody railings. AND here are 2 destroyer questions: Tamya's 1/700 Fletcher is almost nil on surface detail. Any source (and im talking line drawings here) available with such info? And finally...are all Tamya's DD and DE kits crap? If anyone knows of any good ones (at least some detail) then please let me know. As I don't really have the money to splurge on a Resin kit or one of those pricy Skywave models. Well thats all, excuse my crabbiness but its finals week.. ugh. Thank ye' all and happy modeling. Cheers Ralph Hi Ralph, Good luck mate. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Suzanne Bolton" Subject: Help on translation material, please Hi everyone, I need some help.Over the years I have bought alot of Japanese reference books on ships and model building which are excellent but I can't understand a single character.So can anyone think of a good start (books,internet,CD,etc.)where I can begin to learn to understand these mystical captions and finally figure out what I've been looking blankly at for years. I have heard that unless you're very young you shouldn't learn to speak and write Japanese but do one or the other,yet the computer CD's I've seen all combine a bit of all topics,the outcome of which lets you point to which country you'd like to buy an ice cream cone and be polite in asking.Obviously no good when I' m hoping to understand sentence structures,or how Kanji is made up,or even know when,where and what the photo is about. Help me please! All the best, Steve. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Joseph Poutre Subject: Re: Lindberg USS Yorktown/Boxer >> The second "batch" of Essex class ships had the bow redesigned to "poke out" further to allow two 40mm mounts tobe installed to provide more AA weapons at the bow (they also shortened the flight deck slightly). Several books list which ships are which - my book "Essex Class Carriers in action" by squadron/signal includes drawings of the bow section of each type showing the change, since this was a subject that always interested me. I intended for the drawings to be 1/700, but I think they ended up something else. If you're modifying the Hasegawa kit (the long hull kit is either Ticonderoga or Hancock) drop me a line - I can send you some photos showing the changes that need to be made to the bow and flight deck to accurately represent the long hull ships. The kit has the hull right, but the bow mounts and flight deck are wrong. The short hull kit (Essex or Yorktown) is fine as is as to this bow area (okay, the 40mm mount needs a little touching up, but let's not get picky). << Michael, Would you consider doing a writeup and putting it on the SMML website? Maybe scanning in some of those photos? I plan to do USS Princeton twice, (CV-37 and LPH-5 versions) and would appreciate your expertise. I'll be certain to pick up the Squadron/Signal book too. Thanks, Joe Poutre Co-webmaster, Battleship New Jersey Historical Museum Society http://www.bb62museum.org/ Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: "Douglas_J_Martin" Subject: Problems with Hotmail? Shane: This is not an 'official' answer - but I for one have taken to sending all the spam received back to the Hotmail folks (and MSN), so perhaps I'm single handedly clogging up their system.......... More importantly, will WEM be producing a 'Cher', in various scales, er excluding 1:1 due to the amount of 'plastic' required......... Douglas (Scotland - where the Council dont salt/sand the pavements........so its slippery time) PS. Just bought an Airfix Belfast, 1st of them since 1973.....will I build it though? Hi Douglas, Well the hotmail hassles seem to be very intermittant, it'll most probably work itself out. Build the Belfast, it's a nice kit. As for the Cher figure, ummmmmm - it'll give them plenty of practise for the "Bikini" figure ;-ş. Shane - Ducking for cover & glad I'm a looooooong way away from Ledbury ;-))) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- 17) From: Darren Scannell Subject: Gakken Yamato book I have just received my very own copy of the Yamato book by Gakken, of the 1/100 model, from HLJ. What an incredible sight!!!! The photos are excellent and should go a long way to helping me build the Tamiya kit! The model appears to be a group effort and a working model as well. I'm glad I bought it. Darren Scannell -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: Darren Scannell Subject: Re: Enterprise lighting in the hangar deck Kelvin Mok wrote: >> For your flight deck you might use a thin perspex sheet silvered on one side. For the light source these may be those tiny Xenon bulbs used in Maglite flashlights. Perhaps drill recesses into the perspex to receive those bulbs and reduce light loss. May just work. << Kelvin has an excellent suggestion here. I have lighted many models with grain of wheat bulbs rated for 12v operation. I do not use 1.5v bulbs as I find they burn out to quickly. I have never had a heat problem and often use white or silver paint around the bulb for reflectance. Perspex (or Plexiglas or lexan or just plain acrylic sheet) is used in many applications for funneling light. An excellent example is car radios. An acrylic piece is molded to fit the area behind lighted sections and one bulb is placed at one end. Anywhere light is required, a translucent white area is painted to reflect the light out to the window. This works because the light is actually bouncing from surface to surface inside the acrylic and when it hits the white painted area, it comes out rather than bounce, similar to fiber optics. 1/4 inch acrylic and lots of light are required for this technique to be effective. Good luck. Darren Scannell -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: URUDOFSKY@aol.com Subject: Re: "Eilboot"? E-Boot is Eil-Boot (pronounced like isleboat). This has nothing to do with the German word for "eel", which is "Aal" (pronounced with a long A like "daaaart", not like in "ale". T-Boot is short for torpedo boat; S-Boot is short for Schnell-Boot; and E-Boot is short Eil-Boot. The latter two are similar to PT boats. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: "Duane Christensen" Subject: Re: E-Boats E-Boat was actually an Allied term. Stood for "Enemy Boat" I guess they found it easier that the German term "Schnellboot" Duane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: "Alan Mackechnie" Subject: USS Massachusetts Hi, In the summer I was lucky enough to visit the USS Massachusetts at Fall River. Seeing a battleship up close for the first time was a pretty inspiring sight. So inspiring that I joined this list, in fact. Also, after a gap of at least 14 years since my last ship, I would like to have a go at building a model of her. So, can anybody recommend a good model? I'm looking at 1/500 or 1/600 - I don't think I'd be quite up to a 1/350 resin job. In addition, given that I live in Aberdeen, Scotland, where are the best places to buy kits, detailing packs, paint, etc.? Personally, I would rather support a small dealer who cares about the hobby rather than buy from a big chain. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks Alan Mackechnie. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: Ives100@aol.com Subject: Re: Gato/Balo plan book The book is put out by Floating Drydock, and runs $40. Not much text, lots of drawings and photos of WWII submarines in various configurations during the war. Tom Dougherty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23) From: "Bill & Kaja Michaels" Subject: Revell Flower Class Corvette Back in October, I heard that Revell of Germany was going to be re-releasing the old Matchbox 1/72 scale Flower class corvette kit. I've looked at the Revell Germany web site a couple of times since then, and I don't see anythign about it. Anyone know anything about it? Bill Check out my US Coast Guard subjects model list at: http://www.tiac.net/users/billkaja/kitlist.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24) From: Sanartjam@aol.com Subject: Re: HMAS Adelaide Camouflage Hi Paul & SMML, I have only been able to find two photographs of the Adelaide in the1941-42 time period. First, there is a May 1941 photograph of her in Ross Gillett's Australian & New Zealand Warships 1914-1945 that shows her with a light or possibly medium gray hull and upperworks; her funnels may be camouflaged, but I suspect it is shadow instead. Second, I have a photocopy of a photograph from the Australian War Memorial from "C. 1941" in an interesting two-color pattern that seems similar in effect to the first pattern worn by the Perth. The caption (for Negative 300084) states that she is wearing the first of two camouflage schemes in which she was painted in World War II. There are photographs of her in 1943-44 in a two-color pattern, but I presume that was the second pattern to which the caption refers. Hope this helps. While we're on the subject of the Adelaide, does anyone make a model of her in any scale? Wish they did.... Cheers, Art Nicholson Hi Art, I've thought about converting some of the Jap 1/700 CLs to Adelaide, but that's about as far as I've got. A better choice could be WEM's 1/700 HMS Chester??? I also have an APMA resin HMAS Sydney I hull, that could be converted to Adelaide. But this dates back to the early 90s & is pretty basic, but you never know. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25) From: "Peter & Donna Mispelkamp" Subject: Bremen Incident, HMS Swiftsure, E-Boats Bremen: I recall this very well, in fact I stumbled upon a reference to in a book that that I can't access at the moment - deep in storage in another house - that cited an RN sub. CO as saying that he never even had a chance to fire on the Bremen, and so the good old spin doctors at in charge of British War propaganda reshaped the event to highlight the difference between "us" and "them" - after all the Germans had sunk the Athenia just before this incident. HMS Swiftsure: I read the post about the Airfix conversion of a Belfast (I presume) to the Swiftsure and this got me to wonder if anyone out there in SMML land has ever tried to convert (retro-build?) the post war UPC HMS Tiger into the Swiftsure or the HMCS Ontario? I am planning to perform both of these operations and would appreciate some pointers. Yes, I have two UPC Tiger kits just waiting for me to sink my exacto into them! E-Boats: To the best of my knowledge - and I have read extensively on the KM in WW II, the term "E-Boat" was a RN appellation, and had nothing to do with either the German words "Speed" or their nick names for torpedoes. The two best stories I have encountered are that the "E" simply stood for 'enemy' or that it had something to do with the "Lürssen Effekt" that further increased the speed of these ships when they were operating at high speed. My best source for this the excellent Warship Profile no. 31 on the S-Boats. Happy modeling Peter K. H Mispelkamp -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26) From: RCClem@aol.com Subject: Re: Lindberg Yorktown CV-10 Mike Smith and all: That bow on the Lindberg kit will be a problem. The bow and the flight deck make a combination that is not "short" and is not "long" either. Also, the kit has twin rudders, but the real Yorktown had only the single rudder. A lot of detail work could be done to "accurize" the electronics and AAA. I went out and bought: Warship's Data #5 "USS Yorktown (CV-10) and "Essex Class Carriers in Action" Warships #10 Lots of good photos and history. Roger Clemens Hinsdale, Illinois -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27) From: RCClem@aol.com Subject: 54 mm Scale?? I just bought (on eBay) a Higgins boat set that is stated to be in 54 mm scale. I know that this is a military modeling scale and results in men about 2.5" tall. But how did this scale evolve and what does it equate to in terms or units that I am familiar with. i.e. 1" = 35 ft or whatever. Is it close to any other ship modeling scale? Roger Clemens Hinsdale, Illinois -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: Lindberg 1/900 U.S.S. Antietam Charles... I'm pseudo familar with the Antietam kit, as I had it in junior high-school when it was marketed as the USS Philippine Sea. According to Rajendra's List of Ship Kit Reviews (which is worth checking outif you haven't seen it)... http://navismagazine.com/rajendra.htm ...this kit scales out closer to being 1:888 scale. It was released as the Antietam, Valley Forge, and Phillipine Sea (and possibly more, who knows). However, be aware the names must have been selected by the "dart board". The kit represents an SCB-125 modernized Essex/Handcock cl vessel. None of the ships the kit was released under were ever given SCB-125 modernization. Specificaly... Antietam was the first USN CV fitted with an experimental angled deck, but largely retained her WWII appearance otherwise (ie, open bow, original island configuration, twin 5/38s on the flight deck fore and aft of the island, etc). In ways she ended up being one of two oddities among the Essex cl ships. The other being the Lake Champlain that retained the open ended axiel-deck, yet had her WWII weapons largely removed and her island redesigned along the same lines as the other modified Essex cl ships. According to Ships of the US Fleet 65-66, both Antietam and Lake Champlain received a SCB-27A refit in 1952. They were redesignated as CVSs on 7/8/53 and 8/1/57 respectively. Lake Champlain was slated for an SCB-125A refit in 57, but wound up with an SCB-144 instead. SCB-144 may be another term for FRAM II, but I can't verify that. Valley Forge was one of four unmodified Essex cl ships that were redesignated as Amphibious Assault Ships (LPHs) Boxer (LPH-4)(ex CV-21) [FRAM II in '62] Princeton (LPH-5)(ex CV-37) [FRAM II in '61] Valley Forge (LPH-8)(ex CV-45) [FRAM II in ??] Phillipine Sea was one of five unmodifed Essex cl shjps that were redesignated as Auxiliary Aircraft Transports (AVT)s... Franklin (AVT-8)(ex CV-13) Bunker Hill (AVT-9)(ex CV-17) Leyte (AVT-10)(ex CVS-32) Philippiine Sea (AVT-11)(ex CV-47) Tarawa (AVT-12)(ex CVS-40). Data was taken from "Ships of the US Fleet 1965-66" As far as the Lindberg model, I believe it could be built as any of the ships that underwent the SCB-125 modernization. These include... Essex (CVS-9) SCB-27A 2/1/51, SCB-125 3/1/56, to CVS 3/8/60, FRAM 1962) Yorktown (CVS-10) SCB-27A 1/2/53, SCB-125 10/21/55, to CVS 9-1-57, FRAM 1966(?) Intrepid (CVS-11) SCB-27C 6/18/54, SCB-125 5/14/57, to CVS 3/31/62, FRAM 1965(?) Hornet (CVS-12) SCB-27A 10/1/53, SCB-125 8/15/56, to CVS 6/27/58, FRAM 1965(?) Ticonderoga (CVA-14) SCB-27C 12/11/54, SCB-125 2/21/57, to CVS 10/21/69 Randolph (CVS-15) SCB-27A 7/1/53, SCB-125 2/10/56, to CVS 3/31/59, FRAM 1961 Lexington (CVS-16) SCB-27C 9/1/55, SCB-125 9/1/55, to CVS 10/1/62, to CVT 1/1/69 Wasp (CVS-18) SCB-27A 9/28/51, SCB-125 12/1/55, to CVS 11/1/56, FRAM 1964 Hancock (CVA-19) SCB-27C 3/1/54, SCB-125 11/15/56, to CVS after 73 Bennington (CVS-20) SCB-27A 11/30/52, SCB-125 4/1/55, to CVS 6/30/59, FRAM II 1963 Bon Homme Richard (CVA-31) SCB-27C 11/1/55, SCB-125 11/1/55 Kearsarge (CVS-33) SCB-27A 3/1/52, SCB-125 1/31/57, to CVS 10/1/58, FRAM II 1962 Shangri La (CVA-38) SCB-27C 2/1/55, SCB-125 2/1/55, to CVS 6/30/69 Oriskany (CVA-34) SCB-27A As completed, SCB-125A 3/7/59, to CV 7/30/75 Well, that just ate up an hour! Doing this though is making me think about seeing if they still have that Revell Lexington kit down at the local hobby store ). Ah, but alas, where to find 1:535 A-3s, A-4s, F-8s, and E-1s to build it as a Ticonderoga or Shangri La c.1968. Most of this was taken from Ships of the US Fleet 65-66, with additional info on later changes taken from Janes FS 72-73, and 83-84 (can we say I have huge gaps in my research material). The designations (CVA/CVS) are those carried in 65-66. Given the kit has a number of F4D-1 Skyrays molded into the flight deck (and the fact there are no 1:888 scale replacement parts available), you might want to consider building the ship as one of the Essex/Hancock CVA's in the late 50s. The only other option would be to scratch up a 1:888 scale air group for the ship (which might be interesting). You might consider talking to those who model in 1:1200/1250 scale for tips. Even though they work on a smaller scale, they might have suggestions that might prove helpful. When I built my Philippine Sea, I didn't know half of what I know now, but I chiseled/sanded off the molded in aircraft (which looked too cheesy for me even back then) and left the flight deck bare. Hope this helps... _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29) From: Derek Wakefield Subject: Re: Long-Short Essexes Michael... Since you wrote a book on the subject, I'll assume you've done a lot more research on this subject than I have. It's been nearly 20 years now since I did any pseudo serious (topical at best) study on the Essex/Handcock cl CVs. I admit, this is an interesting discussion, and one that's renewed my interest in the ships. However, I'm easily lost in the quagmire of variations in light of all the modernization and reclassifications these ships underwent throughout the 50s and 60s. I have some question about the difference between the short-long hull ships. JFS states the difference between the two types is in their overall length - .876 vs 888 ft oa (with Oriskany being 904 ft oa). You report the difference is shape of bow and flight deck length. Comparing photos of early and later Essex cl ships, I can see the bows on the latter appear longer/extended as a result of a more pronounced forward curve from the wl up to the prow. My guess here is this (at least in part) explains the eight extra feet in length. Or, am I just full of it. Another question. Did the short-long hull designation disappear when the short-hull ships (save for Franklin and Bunker Hill) underwent modernization during the 50s? My guess is that designation no longer applied after the ships were rebuilt with hurricane bows. Speaking of this, I've found a number of mentions of the modernization programs (SCB-27, 27A, 125, 125A, 144, FRAM II, etc) these ships went through. I've heard the ships called Essex, Hancock, and Oriskany cl, I've seen them designated CV, CVA, CVS, CVT, LPH, and AVT. In short, this is a heck of a dust cloud to sort through. I understand the basics of the LPH and AVT redesignations. These were later units of the class that entered service shortly after WWII, and for the most part were unmodernized during the 50s. The only exceptions being Franklin and Bunker Hill, both of which were laid up after WWII due to extensive damage received by kamikaze attacks (of which only the Bunker Hill ever saw service again, as a electronics test ship after she was stricken in the late 60s). I believe a few of these ships were redesignated CVSs for a bit before being redesignated LPHs or AVTs. The only thing about this I've never understood is, like Oriskany, they represented the newest units of the class. Unlike the Oriskany though, they remained almost completely unmodernized. Being they were the newer ships (with the least amount of milage, wear, and tear) it seems to me that they should've been the top candidates for the SCB-125/125A refits, while the older short-hull wartime ships were relegated to the lesser CVS, LPH, and AVT designations. Of course, I'm thinking with chronological logic here and the USN may have been using a different standard of logic. The confusion in my mind though rests with those ships that underwent modernization. My understanding is limited to this... 1) Upon completing the 125 program, all of these ships were redesignated CVA. 2) Not all of the ships that underwent the 125 program received steam catapults. Those that did not remained Essex cl ships, while those that did were redesignated as Hancock cl ships. 3) Through the course of the late 50s and early 60s, the Essex cl ships were redesignated as CVSs, while the Hancock cl ships remained CVAs. 4) With the exception of Lexington, those still remaining on the USN list in 1975 were all redesignated as CVs when the CVA and CVS designations were retired. I admit, this is a generalization, and it may be too broad. Add to this, the confusion of which ships were Hancock cl and which were Essex. For example... Ships of the US Fleet 65-66 Oriskany & Hancock cls = Oriskany, Ticonderoga, Hancock, Bon Homme Richard, and Shangri La. Modernized Essex cl = Essex, Yorktown, Intrepid, Hornet, Randolph, Lexington, Wasp, Bennington, Kearsarge, Lake Champlain, Antietam. JFS 70-71 Hancock cl = Hancock, Bon Homme Richard, Oriskany Essex cl = Essex, Yorktown, Intrepid, Hornet, Ticonderoga, Randolph, Lexington, Wasp, Bennington, Kearsarge, Antietam, Shangri La JFS 72-73 Hancock cl = Intrepid, Ticonderoga, Lexington, Hancock, Bon Homme Richard, Oriskany, Shangri La Essex cl = Essex, Yorktown, Hornet, Randolph, Bennington, Kearsarge, Antietam. The obvious question I'm left with here is did the USN change which ships belonged to which class this often, or did the periodicals just not know which ships belonged to which class? This be supremely confusing. Any help on better understanding this would be supremely appreciated. Dasvidanya! _|_o_|_ Derek "Tiger" (/\)akefield /---(.](o)[.)---\ iscandar2@chatter.com o oo O oo o http://www.iscandar-66.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for having SMML at your home, why not stop by our home at: http://www.smml.org.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume