CV-8 Hornet Aircraft?

Looking at Hornet, she spent until late march 1942 in US waters or in transit from the Atlantic to the Pacific, so, yes it would have been easier to get the newest aircraft aboard her first from a logistical standpoint. But even if the TBFs had reached Hornet, even with those in VT-8, had all other things remained the same, the unescorted TBFs would likely have been annihilated by Kido Butai's Zeros just the same, just as the Midway Detachment was.

Tracy, I can imagine that looking at those status reports would be sobering. Attrition rates in WWII were frightening indeed. Then one adds in meat grinder battles such as Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz, and the Guadalcanal Campaign as a whole for that time period.

I don't think you're totally talking from the rear - the Navy had weekly reports for the locations and numbers of aircraft for most of the war (first one I've seen started in February of 1942). The April 7 1942 report lists VT-8 as only having four TBF-1 with a note "in progress of re-equipping." The week after that they are listed with 9 TBD-1 with the note "14 TBF-1 at Norfolk fly west coast when ready" below. That doesn't change until the May 14 report that states "17 TBF-1 Enroute West Coast" and then "21 TBF-1 arrived Alameda," the week after. The June 4 report has those aircraft at NAS Pearl Harbor (Ford Island) and 13 TBD-1s aboard the ship - the next report lists no TBDs and 31 TBF-1s at Pearl Harbor. It was rather sobering and gloomy when I first went through those reports.....

So it would appear to me that someone up the chain was expecting those aircraft on that carrier before the time of the battle.

stikpusher

I find it interesting how the newest and least experienced Carrier Air Group got those two aircraft types first.

Logistics, probably?  Hornet had just completed her shakedown, when we were attacked, while the other carriers were all on forward deployment (except Saratoga, I think, which was in Bremerton?)  When the TBFs were available, it was probably fastest to fit out the VT-8 detachment with the new planes.  They just missed the ship as she departed for Midway.  It's interesting to think how they might have fared, had Waldron had the time to put the most experienced crews in them and applied his training.

Of course, I could be talking out my Arsch, speculating like this.

Now this brings up an intersting point- it appears that Hornet was the first carrier to take the F4F-4 to sea and combat. Yorktown and Lexington had -3s at Coral Sea. I am curious now as to when VF-6 aboard Enterprise recieved -4s. Also Hornet and VT-8 just missed being the first carrier to take the TBF to sea and introduce them to combat from aboard ship at Midway. I find it interesting how the newest and least experienced Carrier Air Group got those two aircraft types first.

tankerbuilder

Well :

Are you going to tell us what the problems are with the Trumpeter model (That;s the one I was gifted) .

Well you can not get any more definitive evidence as to time and place and types of aircraft carried than this photo. 

Well :

Are you going to tell us what the problems are with the Trumpeter model (That;s the one I was gifted) .

Thank you Tracy. The caption to the photo Tracy provided;

"Most of Hornet's Air Group (made up of 30 F4F-4 Wildcats from VF-8, 12 SBD-3 Dauntlesses from VB-8, 12 SBD-3's from VS-8, and 10 TBD-1 Devastators from VT-8) was carried down in the hangar, but five Wildcats were kept up on deck in case they were needed in an emergency."

I don't know the exact date, but the photo is from Hornet's Navsource page.

Thanks for the pic. Where can I find it and do you know when it was taken I.e. what was being done?

The kit Kats have folding wings  so good to go as shown

Easy - they were F4F-4s. the -3 did not have wing folds and the Wildcats on Hornet clearly did. Look for wing fold panel lines on the kit's Wildcats.

The 1/350 Trump kit has them listed as -3s on the outside box, but the small box inside labels, and contains -4s.

I would be interested to know what really was the situation. Trump obviously had no clear idea.

The 1/200 Merit Hornet I just got has them as F4F-4's as well.

Rick

According to John Lundstrom in "The First Team", Fighting 8 traded in their F4F-3s for -4s in San Diego on the way out. I know the pic says it's a -3, but it wouldn't be the first mis-captioned photo in NARA....

The rear elevator has a bomber or two tied down on top of it so it's not in service. Probably the center one could be cleared if needed. The forward elevator certainly would be. Hornet had catapults both upstairs and downstairs. The issue would have been recovery. A forward recovery certainly would have been dangerous. They would have had to fly to Enterprise.

The two facing forward are certainly SBDs. The scoop at the top of the cowl, low wings, and landing gear positive ID them there. The other two facing aft also look to be SBDs. The shape of the rudder fin is more in line with a SBD than a TBD. Also no folded wings are visible and with that crowded of a flight deck, it would not be likely to have a TBD up there in that bunch with it's wings extended until just prior to launch.

I used Photoshop Essentials to get a better look at the pic and there are actually four a/c back there. Two that you mentioned  are on the starboard side and there  are two on the port side directly across from the other two. It's had to tell what type of a/c they as the most you can see of them is their rudder with stripes. I would guess SBD's.

The escorting destroyer steaming close in aft is USS Gwin, which was lost a year later battling the Tokyo Express at the Battle of Kolombangara.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kolombangara

in this larger version of that photo, you can see that they are SBDs, not TBDs.

Thanks all for the great replies, I didn't think this would generate so much informative discussion.

I do plan to model the Doolittle Raid Hornet, but not sure if I'll build the entire complement of Hornet based aircraft.  I will build all 16 B-25s.  It'll be cool to add the F4Fs to the flight as in the photo as well as what looks like a couple TBDs in the other

I'm sure there are some Hornet crewmembers still around.  I'm pretty sure there are at least two fo the Doolittle raiders still around to celebrate their feat.  Would be awesome to talk to them.

And thanks for the feedback on the Indianapolis, its a great help.    

Well comparing the two reviews, the stern area is most interesting. Again I must say how we are lucky to have competing kits of the same ship in 1/350 again.

In answer to the original question of Academy versus Trumpeter Indianapolis, both have their merits and aspects that may sway you one way or the other. The Trumpeter aft hull is totally fouled up, that's about the worst of it.

Academy Review

Trumpeter review

One of the squids who enlighten us all here pointed out that the Navy deck crews had a pretty good time tying down those Mitchells. If you really study it, there's a lot of pretty creative line work.

The props apparently went downstairs as well and got "upgraded" from Army standards. And then there's all the tarps that got set over the clear parts.

Two TBD's back there I think

When I get up to flight deck level on my 1/350 Hornet, I will be looking at the early part of the mission.

The F4Fs were -3s at that time. No folding wings.  But I will not doubt for a second the ingenuity of the pane handlers & captains. I do recall that the going theory was if they ran into Japanese forces before the B-25s were in range, they would be shoved overboard and the Hornets airgroup spotted for action and launch as soon as possible. Those F4Fs were likely stowed there for that contingency- get a section of fighters up first. As far as the rest goes... I wonder if any of Hornet's crew from there are still alive today to tell the tale.

Also, never discount the ingenuity of the ABM assigned as PC (plane captains).

In addition, the F4F has a very narrow undercarriage, and will get very 'narrow' with the wings folded (even narrower with the wings removed).

This is also still early enough to not have the us/them relationship between brown and black shoes that can mar modern carrier life.  A ABM/C was just as much a member of the goat locker as any other Chief.   Plenty of  material on a birdfarm to cobble up a gin-pole derrick, or an A-frame jib to sway an F4F over the side into the hangar deck.  

As a guess, there was need for one a/c's worth of hangar deck space, which is how the F4F wound up topside in the first place..  But, that's a pure-D guess (if one based on years and years of presenting opportunities to Goat Lockers and getting out of the way of the success).

Thats what I figured as well. Obviously no island in front of the aircraft, and they are tied down facing forward in all other photos. The fuselage codes on the F4F of F-26 indicate it is not a reverse image... a second F4F can be seen behind F-26, and possibly a 3rd. Just a guess, but once the B-25s started being spotted for launch at the rear of the flight deck, the foreward elevator would have been cleared enough for the F4Fs to be put below.

stikpusher, if that picture showing the f4f somewhat inbetween 2 mitchells is not a reverse image than that fighter is parked in front of the island & can't be seen in #2 picture as island is blocking that view.

That is a good question on how it was done...

but it was done... the above photo has to be of the area out of view in this shot

and obviously all cleared by this point

No you see them, now you don't. Just googled Hornet Doolittle raid pictures. There is a picture with two of Hornet's planes on deck back in the pack of B25s. Then there are a couple of pictures showing just the B25s. So how did they make the carrier planes disappear? I don't think there was a side elevator near where the carrier planes were and I don't see how they could have launched them or moved them to a deck elevator. Keep in mind all the pictures are at sea so they didn't lift them off with a shore based crane.