U.S.S. LEXINGTON

Revell issued that kit under many different names.  So far as I know nothing changed except the aircraft and the decals (which did change quite a bit).  

It was a grand old kit; I remember building several when I was in elementary school.  It does have quite a few problems in terms of accuracy - the sort of thing we just didn't think about in those days.  The biggest one is that the hull structure under the flight deck is considerably too skinny.  That box running diagonally on the starboard side is the housing for the escalator that carried aircrews to the flight deck level.  It's supposed to be directly under the island - and it isn't.

I think the one you're recalling from long ago is the Midway-class ship, which was one of Revell's very first ship kits in the early fifties.  The Essex-class one is newer - from the very late fifties or early sixties.  Here's one in a copy of the original box - from Revell's "special subjects" re-release program in 1982: http://www.oldmodelkits.com/index.php?detail=25026 .

Hope you didn't pay much for it.  It's slated for re-release (again) this year by Revell Germany, under the Hornet label:   http://www.revell.de/?id=203&KOKANR=01&KOSCHL=&KGSCHL=&L=1&page=1&sort=0&nc=&searchactive=&q=05121&SWO=&ARMAS4=&KZSLPG=&offset=1&cmd=show&ARARTN=05121&sp=1&nn=1 . 

Revell Germany lists the scale as 1/530.  The company has been known (lots of times) to be wrong about scales, but that sounds about right.

If Revell answers your question, my jaw will drop a foot.

Revell also did a Forrestal series. CV-59, and CV-60.

I built the model of the Lex when I was 14. Little did I know then that I would be driving the real thing in the Gulf of Mexico eight years later. That escalator was a handy thing when it was working (which was hardly ever). It made getting to the navigation bridge a lot easier after eating chow on the mess decks.

HI :

Now you know Dr. Tilley , That I am not going to hold my breath on the Revell thing .Yes , how could they make such a blatant error ? I guess it's good none of us knew much about them , except building them was fun , Right ?

   Model - On      Tanker  - builder

I just looked up the kit in Dr. Graham's history of Revell.  It was originally released, as the Essex, in 1958.  Then it was reissued as the Bonhomme Richard in 1961, the Lexington in 1962, the Oriskany in 1968, the Wasp in 1968, the Hornet in 1970, the Bonhomme Richard again in 1975, the Lexington again in 1976, and the Bonhomme Richard yet again in 1979.  Dr. Graham's coverage ends in 1979, but I imagine it's materialized at least once since then.

Dr. Graham lists the scale as 1/538.

Renewal also had a Lexington (angle deck) out around the same time. But wasn't the kit listed at 1/490 scale (more or less 1/500 scale)

1/500 scale according to this link

www.quuxuum.org/.../shiprevs.html

Lexington (USN CVA-16) {S607} [1/500] (Cold) FH

GOOD. See Essex-class SCB-125 (DRW)

www.quuxuum.org/.../shiprevs.html

Essex-class SCB-125 (USN CVA 14,16,38,others) [1/500] (Cold) FH

Editor's Note: Many Essex class carriers received two major upgrades in the 1950s: SCB-27 and SCB-125. SCB-125 included the angle deck and the enclosed bow.

GOOD. This kit represents an Essex class with the SCB-125 conversion. Specifically, it represents one that received the SCB-27C and 125 conversions during the same yard period. It is thus most accurate as the Shangri-La, (CVA-38) Bon Homme Richard (CVA-31) and Lexington (CVA-16). It may be closest of all to the Shangri-La, since the kit has the regular rectangular elevator forward on the centerline. (not the extented, pentagonal elevator) It would represent these ships in the late 1950s, shortly after their SCB-125 conversion.

Fit is wonderful, especially compared to the Revell 1/535 kit. The sides of the hangar deck fit very securely, unlike those on the Revell kit. The flight deck has engraved wood planking, which is correct for an early SCB-125 Essex, though it is somewhat spoiled by the heavy raised stripes in the landing area. Unfortunately, the bridle catchers are missing.

Another nice thing is the wider beam. While the Revell kit is notorious for being too narrow, the Renwal kit's beam is almost exactly correct.

I like the 5 inch guns on this kit better than those on the Revell kit, but they're still not much. They're slightly cleaner looking, and slightly more detailed, but they still only vaguely resemble the real thing.

Jodie Peeler would be pleased to note that Renwal got the height of the superstructure right. It's almost exactly 3/16 inch shorter than that on the competing Revell kit, just as she prescribes for that kit. She would be displeased to note that the superstructure still hangs too far over the starboard side. The escalator does not line up.

Aircraft include thirteen F9F-8s (seven with folded wings), and two A3Ds. The F9F-8s are just gorgeous. I like them better than the F9F-6s from Revell's Midway class. (or from the "trainer" aircraft set for the Revell Essex class) Revell should have taken lessons from them! You also get a three Regulus missiles on some sort of launch trailer.

The kit's biggest failings are below the waterline. The hull is a bit too boxy below the waterline, and the draught seems a bit shallow. There is no bulb bow, although the tip of the bow seems slightly blunt. There are no bilge keels. Revell's rounder lower hull is generally a better starting point. I do like the five-bladed propellers, though I'm not absolutely sure they're correct for this ship.

This kit is said to date back to about 1958 or 1959. It was been re-issued by Advent once, (as Ticonderoga) and maybe once by Revell. (as Shangri-La?)

Special thanks to Jodie Peeler for her sage advice on Essex-class.

(DRW)

GOOD. (based on in-box review) The hull is a little too shallow. The addition of a hangar deck behind the elevator doors would be a great addition, but still would not cover up the shallow hull lines.

(RDF), review updated 10 April 2007.

OK - bordering on FAIR (based on in-box review). Generally agree with Mr. Wells' comments, but feel hull really detracts; too shallow below the waterline by 1/5" - but even shallower above waterline (freeboard); by 0.387" - and w/typical Renwal "indented waterline" hull recessed below waterline. Prop-insertions inaccurate - hardly matters considering hull. Above decks some great features; forward bow area and flight deck correct for SCB-27c/SCB-125 ships (Lexington-II, Bon Homme Richard and Shangri-La), though bow rake somewhat exaggerated by squat hull. Flight deck excellent; planking lines raised, but very fine. Catapult tracks correct for SCB-27c/SCB-125 (C-11s). Island even better (though lacking is surface detail and railings need removal); platforms and splinter shields w/beautiful bracing/support detail, solid fit and very nice bridge (window) enclosures. Disagree with Dave on some aircraft; Cougars a little too missile-shaped for me, though Skywarriors also pretty nice. Discard or find other use(s) for (3) Regulus missiles and HRS helicopter (inaccurate anyway) - should have been an HUP or HUS. Guns a mixed bag; 5"ers just awful (look like overly squat and stubby machine guns in 1/72 scale) but twin-3" AAs rather good - very similar to Dewey/King kit. This build will be challenging; "Fair" rating above only earned by quality of flight deck, island and about half the details - all of which I would seriously consider grafting onto a 1/540 Essex hull. (And use leftover hurricane bow to bash modernized Revell Midway, perhaps.) Otherwise, substantial hull work required on which the above-deck details - with new 5" guns and PE of course - should yield a gorgeous build. And at a size which will really stand up next to your Revell Boston escort.

(MMS)

Editor's Notes: Renwal issued this kit at various times as:

Ticonderoga (CVA-14)

Lexington (CVA-16) (kit S607)

Shangri-La (CVA-38) (kit S600)

and maybe others!

It has been re-issued by

Advent (as Ticonderoga)

Proff :

  You better get a catchers mitt for your jaw .REVELL actually did send an answer to my E.mail page .An Al KLOKOWSKI  sent a statement that was basically this . " To the best of our knowledge when the kit was done the scale was 1/540 according to the archive plans . ' That's it and no other comments . I am like you ,and skeptical of  any corporate entity answering our requests . Hope your chin doesn't get sore .  He ! He !    Tanker - Builder