"A new scenario" Challenge Idea

Maybe like this:

courtesy navsource.

i'd be interested if you included BB-38 in her 1945 fit.

Bill

I'm thinking anything goes, short of harpoons and phalanx systems. As I said, based on what was done to Nevada, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and California, Maryland and West Virginia, and work done just after Pearl Harbor, up until '45. I'm not into tying anyone's hands on this; after all, it is for fun. The question to be answered is; "What do you think She would or could have looked like later in the war?"

(I don't think ARIZONA goes well with armored box launchers and SH-60's .  .  . but hey, it's an interesting concept)

Sort of like making her into a assualt ship like the I.J.N. did and give her a flight deck behind the superstructure, and maybe some torpedo launchers in a couple locations on the sides.

Well, ARIZONA did have four torpedo tubes when originally built, but they were deleted well before the 1940's. A hybrid like the Japanese ISE class would also be interesting, but you would have to make it theoretically 'workable'.

the Arizona would look llke what Pennsylvania did after her modernization.

Not necessarily; upgrades and /or modernaizations aboard ship can be determined by a variety of needs. For example, the repairs required in PENNSYLVANIA allowed for a certain upgrade schedule and then a modernization a year later. NEVADA's rebuild was entirely different, and the two classes were not that different from each other. The CALIFORNIA and TENNESSEE modernizations were quite different, despite being the same class.

This build (if we do it) is based in supposition and which timeframe you might want to portray. So, the end result is wide open for potential configuration changes.

the Nevada suffered more Pearl Harbor attack damage then did Pennsylvania so Nevada was modernized while being repaired. the California was modernized while being repaired from damage done at Pearl Harbor whereas Tennessee was modernized because she had not really been upgraded since built nor had yet have torpedo bulges built onto the hull.

Exactly, thus the modernization of ARIZONA was not a foregone conclusion. As of early December, she was expecting air search radar and the installation of four 1.1" quad mounts and their associated directors. Shortly thereafter it was found that the 1.1" mounts were not sufficient so the 40mm Bofors mounts were added to many ships as a retrofit. This is just a sample of the variables in the modernization process between 1942 and '45.  So, as I said, there is a lot of of opportunity to explore here; let's have at it!

I'm actually surprised that I have to sell this !!!

I could see her with her 5 inchers replaced with 3 5"/38 twin mounts on each side and an over abundance of 40's and 20's.  Not fast enough to keep up with the fast carriers, but suitable for escorting landing forces and offshore fire support and AA duties.  Similar to the other old BB rebuilds.

We're talking about a 30 year old ship, when the lifespan was generally 20 years,and technology was at mach speed for the time.

I might suggest the banner/hobby boss 1/350 kits, as there might be more available secondary armament out there than the revell Arizona and Missouri boxing's to choose from for a "what if".

HooYah Deep Sea

I'm actually surprised that I have to sell this !!

Group Builds are a little complicated in detail.

Having participated in dozens here over the years, I offer a few observations.

There has to be a general interest that goes beyond your own. The subject needs to have some connection to the participants willingness to devote time to see it through.

The ability to participate depends for a lot of us on what we have on hand, esp. this year of incertaintude.

Most GB's give broad latitude to whether any aftermarket or scratchbuilding is needed.

I'm with DDP- it's hard to see where the answer isn't BB-38. I was suggesting that I would be interested in building a 1945 Pennsy; the thought of her class in Measure 32 is pretty cool.

You should participate in a good handful of GB's to see what works and what doesn't. 

People like flexibility and choices and you'll need at least 20 or so initial participants to make it through to the end with four or five. So be open to a more general approach. I can think of a few but it's not for me to suggest them.

Bill

goldhammer

We're talking about a 30 year old ship, when the lifespan was generally 20 years,and technology was at mach speed for the time.

I recently did a study of the design requests for proposal of USN capital ships that served in WW2.

It was in response to an assertion someone made that the Iowas and Essexes were put together in response to the early defeats in WW2. Not at all accurate, and the point is that the Midways were such, but right after mid 1942. The South Dakotas and I think North Carolinas were put into design in the early 30's when it was anticipated that Japan would withdraw from the London Naval Treaties.

The Essexes were put into development after Japan did break those Treaties in the mid thirties and were on the boards by 1938.

Likewise the Iowas were also requested in the late thirties andwere in design before the war started.

So what to do with a super dreadnaught? They were really slow and that is hard to fix. Heavily armed though. The Brits decommissioned the Revenge Class late in the war to repurpose their guns (kind of similar to BB 39).

They sold one to Russia.

There's a thought- BB-39 sold to a foreign country like Greece. The Allies sold them all kinds of ships- there's a Fletcher museum ship there still.

Lot's of fun to think about.

Bill

Point well taken, thank you. I see now how limited a subject like this would be for a GB.

As for Greece, how wide is the Corrinth Canal; could the 'new' Greek superdreadnaught, SALAMIS go through it?

Bill, the Royal Sovereign was loaned to the Russians not sold to them as Russia gave it back after the war.

in my Arizona kitbash thread http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=165105 i'm working on the 1945 version of the Pennsylvania mk2.