USS Texas BB-35

Unfortunately, if USS Texas is released by one of the Japanese companies, the price tag would be up there with ISW's, but the ISW kit would probably be better. Look at the price tags attached to Tamiya's Yamato, Hasegawa's various battleships, and Aoshima's prices ( a little more reasonable). If Trumpeter or Academy were to manufacture the Texas, we could expect better prices. But, when considering the price of the ISW kit, it already comes with brass gun barrels and photoetch detail parts, including all railings. Most builders would probably purchase those separately, further adding to the price of a plastic kit.

Since I already have the ISW kit, I would probably not buy another Texas just because it was plastic (unless it were of a different period!)

Bill

Then you have the major leak that occured in June or July of last year when water began to pour into the port fuel tanks, causing a huge list to port, but the fact that the ship is now slightly over 100 years old complicates matters because of the technology used to build her. Also not haveing enough money to properly support such a large vessel has led to far to much deterioration of the hull. Last time i went to see her she sat low in the water because of seepage into the hull. Dry berthing her would be the best bet for preservation, only issue is getting the people of Texas to donate enough money to implement the several million dollar plan. So really it's a question of when the hull with completly deteriorate and the ship cannot be saved.

If your going to visit the Battleship Texas she is located at the San Jacinto state park just east of Houston. Just look for the San Jacinto Monument, which looks a lot like the Washington monument in Washington DC. It right next to it so you can't miss it.

Anyway, I was appalled by the extensive amount of rust! He showed me places where the hull plating had rusted through, with water seeping in a steady flow. It was sad to witness. I hoppe that the Navy somehow gets involved again to set her right. She is a remarkable recruiting tool!

Bill

I remember my visit to the Texas very well. My late uncle was a volunteer and he gave me a tour of the entire ship, not just the spaces open to the general public.

Prof Tilley's most excellent post reminds me that I meant to say that I feel a dry berth is the only answer for BB-35's continuing preservation.  She just has too many rivets, and spent too many decades under less-than stellar stewardship.

As I understand it, .the dryberthing schemes ran afoul of  hurricane wind protections and some increased flooding conditions that were established after Ike.

Now, as a point of contrast, that two hour drive from San Jacinto to "Seawolf Park" in Galveston is quite striking.  The treatment of Cabala & Stewart have received is quite appalling.

The Texas emphasizes a problem that ship preservationists all over the world are having to face with increasing frequency. 

Any trained, professional conservator knows that, shearly from the preservation standpoint, about the worst thing you can do to a ship is to float it in water.  The problem, generally speaking, is worse for wood ships, which do two things when they're constantly afloat:  they rot, and they hog (i.e., sag at the ends).  Steel ships obviously last a lot longer in water than wood ships do, but steel doesn't last forever.  The people in charge of World War II-vintage (and older) steel ships all over the place are having big problems these days with rust and leakage of various sorts, as the hulls approach the end of their intended lifespans.

The problem is greatly exacerbated by the big factor that looms over all such projects:  money.  Small staffs of low-paid professionals and unpaid volunteers have the responsibility of maintaining huge, aging machines whose maintenance, when they were in commission, provided full-time employment for hundreds or thousands of men.  Anybody who takes on a ship preservation project quickly learns that, given the financial realities, it's just about impossible to keep up with the ship's demands.  The real question is how far behind you can fall before the ship actually starts to fall apart.

The great preserved ship in my neck of the woods, the North Carolina, is another example.  She's been leaking seriously for years.  There's no danger that she'll sink (she's firmly stuck in the Cape Fear River mud), but the staff concluded several years ago that something had to be done.  For a while there was talk of towing her up to Newport News (the nearest facility with a dry dock that's big enough) and doing a thorough patch job.  But the estimate for the job was in the tens of millions of dollars.  Now the plan, as I understand it, is to fix the major leaks one at a time by building a series of relatively small cofferdams next to the rustiest areas of the hull and pumping out the water so the shipfitters can go to work.  That will cost millions, and take several years.  When it will start I don't know; for the time being the money simply isn't there.

Another consideration:  the ethics of artifact conservation frown on any approach that entails destroying and replacing the original fabric of the ship.  We've all heard arguments about how much of the Constitution or the Victory still exists.  Our grandchildren probably will be having similar conversations about the Texas and the North Carolina.

I don't care for the Mikasa approach either - and I think that glass enclosure that's recently been built around the Cutty Sark is a monstrosity.  But the unfortunate truth is that, for the sake of the ship herself, the best thing to do with an historic ship is to get her out of the water.  I wish the caretakers of the Texas the best of luck.

What type of pistol are they offerring?

There are/were several interesting proposals to the dry berth project.  Where all pluck her from the water at least it will help preserve her better than if she were left in the water and mud that is corrosively eating away at her hull.  One, or maybe couple would allow visitors to walk under the hull which would be very impressive as I was impressed when I had the opportunity to walk under a destroyer in San Diego several years back.  All of the options sound better than how the Mikasa is preserved, where she is essentially planted in the ground and none of her hull touches the water nor will it have the opportunity to do so again – something already taken into consideration for the Texas.

I checked both websites and they do not appear to have the dry berth project available at the moment but came across something interesting.  The foundation is selling commemorative pistols – granted for a princely sum – they are based on those provided to the crew 100 years ago.

Yeah, apparently the dry berth project is on indefinite hold..

I have mixed feelings about that.  

Having lived four decades' in Texas, I well remember my first visit to BB-35.  She was clad in a generally post war sort of not-quite Measure 13,, with large shaded hull numbers.  Stepping on deck was perverse, the teak being hidden under a 8-10" slump concrete.  She was a 'dead' ship, too, grounded (on purpose) in the much of her "berth."  Both catapults had  OS2U Kingfishers mounted, yet she had 1.1" quad mounts where 40mm mounts had been.  Some of the 20mm gun shields were present, but not the mounts nor guns..  She was dry inside, if by means of sump pumps in the bilges (but, you could tour the engine spaces & upper steering engine  space).

So, after The Refit, she was a marvel.   (Although there was a strong local reaction to the vibrant Measure 21 )   The fancy new mooring meant you could feel the ship, 'alive' upon the water--if the sheltered cove carved for her from the Houston Ship Channel).  Gone were the anachronisms.  As much as possible, she was in '43-44 configuration.  Gone, sadly, were the Kingfishers, but this also better matched the photos from her time on the gun line at Normandy, too.

She had become very much more worth a two hour drive (and an hour of that circling around the east semicircle of Houston traffic (Beltway 8 very much improved that, if for what seemed like $17 in tolls; now much obviated by TollTag).  I was happy to take advantage to the "hardhat tours" which went into the less-accessible, less-well painted areas of the ship.

Alas, my last visit was September '11, when I donated them an OBA, and some battle lanterns and the like.  Now, I like in this wretched landlocked "metroplex."  No more to share the same county as the Museum of the American GI, to be 4 hours' away from USS Kidd; three hours' from Galveston; four hours' from Fredricksburg and the Nimitz museum.  Such is life, one supposes.

nope.

CapnMac82-  When I visited the Texas a year ago I was informed  the Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept. is working on putting the ship in some form of permanent dry dock/display in order to preserve the hull.

ddp59-I think that may be a good way to go, Did cutting a section out of the center mess up the length to beam ratio?

Jim

2/20 Bluemax, i'm using a revell 1/426 scale arizona as a basis to convert to the texas. had to cut a section out of the middle to shorten it to correct length, used a bench top beltsander to get the angle of the maindeck right as not stepped like the arizona & redoing the gun casements in the hull both in the bow & stern.

deattilio

Unlike many other subjects, the Texas Parks and Wildlife and Battleship Texas Foundation is available to assist in detail and research, and with the limited correspondence I have had with those organizations they have always been friendly and accommodating.  All that seems to be lacking is a company willing to commit plastic to mold.

They are an excellent bunch to work wit--I made some donations of 1:1 historical artifacts which really helped them with their DC station display.

Amy organization that helped them document the ship, or inspired more interest in the ship, would be welcomed with open arms.  The current staff faces an uphill battle of correcting what was done wrong to the ship for almost 40 years, and of keeping any new calamity from undoing what is presently ok (other than taking on water, the ship rode out Ike comparatively well for being 90-soemthing years old at the time).  The Ship's Manager knows the hurdles of facing issues like finding paint that is historically accurate, is affordable on the budget, does not require closing the ship for long periods, and is contact-safe for visitors.  No small hurdle.

A good bunch of people.

Got it. I'm surprised I missed this web site. A lot of good information I didn't have before.

Jim

have a look at this link. www.bb35library.usstexasbb35.com/.../FullSizeAll.html

I stand corrected on my claim I don't have body sections. The plans given me while visiting the USS Texas has 15 cross sections. While they aren't the normal sections with lifts, buttock lines and diagonals I can make my own.  The January 2003 issue of FSM has a scratch build article on the Texas which would serve as good guide.

Jim

I was aware of the 1/350 offering but had'nt seen the 1/700 before - many thanks for that one.  It took some hunting to find one of the stores that still had one in stock and submitted my order with White Ensign Models.  My TEXAS collection will be complete once SSN gets docked in the stash.

Thanks again!

For a USS Texas SSN-775, just use the Virginia class submarine model. The only real difference is the hull number.   http://www.scalehobbyist.com/catagories/Ship_Models/HBB00083513/product.php?

I’ve managed to gather – in 1/700 – all but the latest USS Texas SSN 775; I am still awaiting that offering.  Given that for some reason it is less popular than say a Bismark or Arizona, the CSS Texas, USS Texas (1895) and USS Texas (1945) are in resin.  As I have not had much experience with resin kits they sit and wait their turn in the stash along with the styrene USS Virginia CGN-38 that I will model as the USS Texas CGN 39.  Aside from a 1/48 LCM, they are the only waterborne vessels in my stash/collection.

Should a manufacturer commit to a 1/350 styrene BB35 USS Texas comparable in cost to other 1/350 BB offerings, I too would jump through the porthole for that kit.  Unlike many other subjects, the Texas Parks and Wildlife and Battleship Texas Foundation is available to assist in detail and research, and with the limited correspondence I have had with those organizations they have always been friendly and accommodating.  All that seems to be lacking is a company willing to commit plastic to mold.

Amen! An affordable plastic cage-mast BB would be nice, too.

Close, but the page for Texas is listed just below it. I think it is the 45(?) fit.

this http://www.hnsa.org/doc/plans/bb35.pdf

Look at the webpage, www.hnsa.org. I recall there being a copy of the Booklet of General Plans for Texas.

ISW  makes a great looking Texas, but it's outside of my price range. I have quite a bit of info I was given by one of the engineers involved in restoring and maintaining the Texas, however, the information does not include a body plan, which if I had, I could scratch build a model of the ship.

Jim

CapnMac82

Yep, if memory serves, all four Texas' can be built.

In plastic, I want to remember there is a Virgina-class to build as SSN-775

Pretty sure there is an explicit CGN-39 (or a Virgina-class to modify)

ISW has BB-35 covered

And, I want to remember there is a Confederate Texas in resin.

But, I could be wrong about any of the above.

ISW also makes the 1898 USS Texas (BB2) in 1:350 scale

Yep, if memory serves, all four Texas' can be built.

In plastic, I want to remember there is a Virgina-class to build as SSN-775

Pretty sure there is an explicit CGN-39 (or a Virgina-class to modify)

ISW has BB-35 covered

And, I want to remember there is a Confederate Texas in resin.

But, I could be wrong about any of the above.

I agree!!!!

In the meantime, the ISW 1/350 resin kit is outstanding!

Bill