New Trumpeter 1/200 Arizona Released! w/Crew!

Bocks Suv

Thanks for the clarification. Yeh, traditional paint schemes and colors would win over a perfect pink plane, but I bet there are some heated discussions among judges over what were the actual colors and numbers on planes and armour.  You should have seen the look on my face when I first saw models of polka-dot bombers that were used to form up a squadron.  BTW, what are "holidays??" 

Paint holidays are uneven/missed spots or thin application which allows the underlying colors to show.   I believe it comes from saying that the painter took a holiday [i.e. vacation] during the paint job.

of course, if the real thing had paint holidays and you are trying to replicate them you need to provide some sort of documentation for the judges so that they won't mark you down.    We don't know everything.   Otherwise it may get identified as a fault.

I just got the kit, and was looking at the paint guide.  I'm just guessing here, but the navy blue listed seems too dark to me.  And, were the fighting tops really white, or were they a light grey, such as light gull  or light ghost grey?  I'd like to use Model Master or Tamiya paints, as I already have quite a stock of these and really can't afford any new paint due to the cost of the kit.  Could anyone make any reccomendations?  Thanks for your help!

Bigb123

I just got the kit, and was looking at the paint guide.  I'm just guessing here, but the navy blue listed seems too dark to me.  And, were the fighting tops really white, or were they a light grey, such as light gull  or light ghost grey?  I'd like to use Model Master or Tamiya paints, as I already have quite a stock of these and really can't afford any new paint due to the cost of the kit.  Could anyone make any reccomendations?  Thanks for your help!

The consensus pretty well agrees that everything above the top of the stack was Light Gray.  It is generally thought  it was the designation 5-L Light Gray.  Documentation shows that it might have been 5-H Haze Gray, but there has been no confirmation that the Arizona had been converted at the time of Dec 7.  The blue is probably the wrong shade.  The Navy blue they are recommending is not the same shade as 5-N Navy Blue.  And there is no evidence at all that the Arizona was ever this color.  It may have been 5-S Sea Blue, which was lighter than 5-N Navy.  But, while the order had been issued to repaint the battleships at Pearl, in 5-S, and the Arizona had the opportunity, there is no paperwork yet found that confirms it was done.  Prior to the order for the 5-S Sea Blue replacement of 5-D Dark Gray, all the battleships were 5-D.  Or you can make it for 1940 when it was Standard Navy Gray. 

There is a website somewhere that tells you what premade colors match these the best for the different paint manufacturers.  I am sure one of the other people here can tell you the link.  I don't have it.

Thank you, tucchase.  I went back and read this post again.  With what you and the others say, I will definitely go with 5-L for the tops, and I'll probably use FS 36375 light ghost grey.  And for the main color, I'm still undecided...it's a tie between 5-D and 5-S.  But, which shade of blue or grey to use for these?  If grey, how about FS 36320 dark ghost gray, or if I need darker maybe gunship or euro I gray?? And for blue, FS 35042 lightened with enough flat white (or maybe intermediate blue??) to get something similar to what the model in the Arizona memorial is painted?  Would these be good choices?  I'd actually like to use the 5-S blue - it just looks neater to me.  But, I'd like to be as accurate as I can.  I hate to bug and be a pest, but, if you or someone else could help me decide, I'd be greatful.  Thank you again! Normal 0 MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

I meant 5-N instead of S...I think..

I checked White Ensign's site for Standard Navy Gray and 5-S, D, and L against the tables/charts on the site www.paint4models.com (pretty neat to see regardless of accuracy).  Here's what I can come up with:

5-S  Sea Blue US 07 FS 35109 MM2031 Blue XF-18

5-D Dark Gray US 04 FS 36320 MM1741 Dark Ghost Gray  XF-22

5-L Light Gray US 03  FS 36375 MM1728 Light Ghost Gray  XF-19

Standard Navy Gray US 01 FS 36440 MM1730 Flat Gull Gray XF-66

Again, not sure if these are right.  Please advise.  Thanks!

If White Ensign and Paint4models say so, I would go with that.  The color 5-D was said by some sailors to be nearly black.  In 1/200 scale it should be a little lighter.  I read somewhere that someone had come up with a formula of how much white to mix with the color to get the correct scale shade.  It was either here, or on Ship Modeler Forum.  I wish I had thought to save it, but that was over a year ago.

As for 5-N Navy Blue, according to memos, it had been ordered, I believe, for trial use, but none of the BBs had been done yet.  Of course some document may pop up that blows all this into the water.  So, as an option for the Arizona, it would not be historical, but if the Arizona had survived it would have probably received a coat of it at some point.  So if you want to use that color, that's up to you!   As the man said, "Whatever floats your boat!"  And I am not trying to be sarcastic or anything.  I am just saying everyone has to make their own decision according to what makes him or her self happy with the model they are working on.  Enjoy!  Don't forget to post pics if you can!

tucchese, thank you!  I appreciate your help and patience.  And, 5-S (not N) is what i'll use...I get confused too easily.  As I said before, I'm not sure how accurate paint4models is, but, I feel it is the best of the paint conversion tables that I've come across to date.  Anyhow...I'll sure post pictures.  Besides, regardless of the color issue, this kit looks like its going to be a really fun build.  That's actually my favorite part of the modeling process.. the actual assembling/gluing of the plastic parts. I'm excited! 

LOL, you're not alone in getting confused!  I think I have too many facts running though my head and they battle with each other for dominance, and whichever ones are currently winning are usually what comes out of my fingers.  And like you, I enjoy the assmbly process.  As a kid, it was many years before I actually started pianting my models.  And it was all brush work even then.  Who knew from airbrushes?  On this model I am going to push the envelope in several directions, though.  It should be quite a learning experience!

Absolutely!  I get to the point that stuff automatically dumps out of my short-term memory..and it's gotten me in fixes more times that I would like to admit.   As for the brush painting, I started that with my first model..but, then I was just an eight-year-old kid and to me (and my parents, of course ) it looked like a work of art!  

I will ask you one more thing..as far as the deck..do you think I should go with MM Wood, Tamiya deck tan, or maybe MM Sand?  I usually go with MM wood on most of my ships, and am pretty content with what I get from it.

Sorry, I am not familiar with the differences between those three colors.  Maybe someone else here can chime in as to which might be a better match for dry, holystoned teak wood.  Off-hand I would say go with what you are familiar with.

That's okay.  Not a problem.  I figure something like that would be a "gray" area anyway...pardon the pun. They're all just slightly different shades of tan, anyway.  I'll go with a lighter shade since you mention the holystoning.  I'd imagine the deck would be pretty worn from that and just foot traffic.  Thanks!

Another color for decks that I don't think has been mentioned is tamiya's Buff.  It may not have the brightness of holystoned teak but for scale effect I think it would be fine. Jon

You're right!  I didn't think of that, but I do have a few jars of it.  Thank you!

tucchase

Sorry, I am not familiar with the differences between those three colors.  Maybe someone else here can chime in as to which might be a better match for dry, holystoned teak wood.  Off-hand I would say go with what you are familiar with.

Dry, holystoned teak shown on the bow of the USS Idaho in September 1940.

You do not want a monochrome deck painted from a single jar of paint.   Rather you want to apply a base wood color,  mask and apply a second similar color but with a slight color shift, them mask and apply a third.   Since you're working in a large scale you probably would want to seal the whole deck with a coat of Future then apply a dark wash  to replicate the joints and caulking between the boards.

You're saying something to the effect of painting individual planks in varying shades of brown/tan?  The wash would, indeed, be good and fairly easy, considering the deck planks are scribed and not raised like on the 1/350 kit.

This may be a really dumb question, but why did the Navy use exposed wooden decks on ships and carriers? Seems like we'd use just metal, metal over wood or tar over wood.  Did the Germans and *** use wood?  What do we use now?

I think Ed has the right approach.  Painting the deck with different shades is the way to go, at least for me.  I'm thinking about filling all the but ends of the planks so that they look like continuous the length of the deck.  Then painting something similar to what Ed has described.  I'm not sure about using a wash to darken the engraved lines between the planks though.  I think that might be too harsh.  Although it's a big ship it's still 1:200 and that's pretty small.

I would love to see some examples of painted decks that people have done.  Worthy of another post I think.

Dave 

Bocks Suv

This may be a really dumb question, but why did the Navy use exposed wooden decks on ships and carriers? Seems like we'd use just metal, metal over wood or tar over wood.  Did the Germans and *** use wood?  What do we use now?

Probably for repair purposes. Lay down some new planking over battle damage and youre back in business as a flight decck. Look here at USS Yorktown at Midway. She was repaired and operational again after taking three hits at midday from Japanese dive bombers. And by the time of Pearl Harbor, USN carrier flight decks were stained blue, not bare wood. Although pre war they were stained Mahogony.

The decks on a Battleship would have been 4" to 8" (or better) thick armor. There's another reason for the wood, but I'll be d@^*$% if I can recall it.

Here is a build I used to help complete my own 350 Arizona. He has a labor intensive way of doing the deck but it looks good in the end.

http://www.rollmodels.net/nworkbench/onlinebuild/arizona/arizona3.php

How about for footing purposes? unless a non skid paint is applied, painted metal is pretty slick when wet. And did battleships not have deck armor beneath the planking?

The wood was irrelevant to the armor of the deck. I  recall seeing specs that called out a 0.5 thickness function of the main armament, though it could have been the armor belt thickness. As you can imagine, if a projectile penetrated that deck thickness, a wood patch wouldn't really address the likely casualty resulting. But there's more than simple tradition behind the wood deck...I just can't remember.

Footing is certainly a valid a supposition.

I found this on the USS Massachusetts website:

HIT THE DECK: Quite often the battleship's visitors will ask, "Why are the decks made of wood?" The decks are not made of wood, but are covered with an expensive, dense, oily hardwood called teak. More than 40,000 square feet of two-inch-thick teak cover Big Mamie, including substantial portions of the main deck and most of the 01 - 03 superstructure levels.

Teak was used on battleships and cruisers to provide sound and temperature insulation and to provide safe walking surfaces for crewmembers. Teak was chosen for its durability, rot resistance, and the fact that its oil helps preserve the underlying steel deck from corrosion

(LOL) That's it!

Anti-slip paint additives were well known, but insulation was imperative and had that side benefit of providing good footing (and something for the Swabbies to scrub).

If you've ever walked the steel deck of a dead silent ship, you can appreciate the sound aspect, too. Imagine full battle roar transmitted through that big steel drum.

Those crewmen do look kinda bored here... USS Idaho 1941, courtesy of Life magazine

Maybe they should be on their knees masking off every 2nd and third individual board to make the finish on the planking look more realistic.

Maybe that was what was ordered, but they did the masking perpendicular to the intended result.

LOL   Don't give the Navy any new ideas on how to keep a sailor busy!  LOL

It cant be any worse than the Army's "area beautification"...