DML 1/350th USS Independence

Tracy,

I'm just curious.Does the Independence being an escort carrier look the same as the Hasegawa Gambier Bay. What I mean is, were they converted from the same type of cruisers? If not how do they differ? I'm meaning to get both if my budget will permit me. Thanks.

constructor

Tracy,

I'm just curious.Does the Independence being an escort carrier look the same as the Hasegawa Gambier Bay. What I mean is, were they converted from the same type of cruisers? If not how do they differ? I'm meaning to get both if my budget will permit me. Thanks.

I'm not Tracy, but ...

The Independence was a CVL -- or Light Carrier,  not a CVE -- Escort Carrier.

The design of the CVL was based on a cruiser hull.    The design of the CVE was based on a Liberty Ship hull .     The CVL was longer than the CVE.   The two classes were distinctively different,  (well they were both aircraft carriers).   

While CVL's carried air operations on their own right,  they were more often tasked with being the "back stop" or reserves.   They might be tasked with providing CAP over the fleet while the aircraft from the CVs were on an attack.   Their pilots and planes may be transferred to a CV to replace losses.    CVE's, while serving in both theaters of the war, seem to be more associated (at least in my mind) with the Atlantic.  They provided hunter-killer ASW teams and escorted convoys.   Daniel Gallery's CVE,  the Guadalcanal participated in the capture of U505

Buy one (or more) of each.  They're different & unique

Ed's got it correct except for one thing. There were several classes of CVE during the war with no one type of hull used. The Bogue class was based off of the C3 hull design whereas the Casablanca Class that Gambier Bay was part of was based off of a P1 hull design (the C stands for Cargo and the P passenger).

CVLs had the speed to keep up with the other fleet carriers (Essex class, Saratoga, Enterprise) and would usually be attached to a task force something like two Essex class to one CVL. CVL-22 herself took part in the first fast carrier raids in late 1943 as the US worked up to the main push back on Japan.

CVEs were mainly used for smaller actions as they could not keep up with the faster carriers. They did a lot of anti-submarine work, training, aircraft ferrying, as well as hitting smaller targets that didn't have as many defenses. CVE-72 Tulagi took part in  Operation Dragoon, the invasion of southern France and there were F6F hellcat vs german fighter action.

Both types had a significant part to play in the war and both kits are decent, so I'd recommend both if you can afford it and enjoy the subject matter. I'm working on a Gambier Bay right now myself.

The CVE's were also used extensively as air support for amphibious operations (Leyte Gulf stands out along with many others). While the Fast Attack Carriers were off carrying out strategic operations the CVE's were carrying out tactical operatons in support of ground forces.

Dear Chat-groups.

Instead Of Going To My Local Hobby Shop To Buy The USS Independence Carrier Ship Model Which Will Cost Me 8% Sales Tax In California.Which May Be Too High! I Might Consider Buying One Online At Military Issue.Com Because It's Most Convenient For Me. The Price Listed As $149.00 So It's A Relative Good Deal And Free UPS Ground Shipping Is Included, I Do Receive Their Catalogs By Mail And The Person I Talked To Over The Phone Told Me That Prices Are Subject To Change So I Hoping To Get This Nice Thing By Early March If I Can.

Best Of Luck To Me!

Mr. Hobbyman      

USA.

Warning: tax evasion can cause excessive use of capitalization!

Concerning Navy Blue Randy Short  - who imports White Ensign paints in the US and sells highly regarded paint samples for both US and IJN ships - was kind enough to talk with me about this color. (Don't know why, but White Ensign can't keep the stuff in stock.) He points out that deck blue was actually "darker" than navy blue (although in the world of greys/blues/purples such terms are tricky) it rarely appeared that way because the light hit it so differently. As most folk don't display their kits outside, I suppose one can make an argument that some sort of "scale effect" might be in order here. On one thing I'm pretty sure: Gunze Mr. Hobby US Navy Blue is simply too dark - certainly for ships. I made a witches' brew based upon a recipe given to me by Ed McDonald who builds model ships professionally (http://finescalewarshipmodeling.com/index.htm):

Normal 0

4 parts - Dark Gray (XF24)

6 parts - Flat White (XF2)

1 part - Flat Red (XF7)

5 parts - Flat Blue (XF8) (Ed admits his notes are a little unclear and that the color here could be the slightly darker Royal Blue X3)

I kept the batch and when I finally got my White Ensign deck blue from the UK I was pleased to see that the colors are extremely close. But as Tracy White (I believe) noted on some thread here, US ships were given a purple blue paste, some white paste and ratios to mix them with.

As far as CVE and CVLs are concerned, there were a whole lot of CVEs - CVE 123 Bastogne was launched a week after VJ day. (There were a few numbers missing: figure just over 100.) All were built on merchant ships but varied in size a fair amount: some built on small fast liberty ships displaced about 8,000 - a small bunch built on oilers were closer to 12,000. And some in between. The Casablanca and Commencement Bay classes made up the bulk of them. As noted earlier, CVLs were built on Cleveland class cruiser hulls and were designed for fleet operations. Depending upon the type of CVE they carried a few more or about the same number of planes. The make-up of the flight groups was (I won't bet my pink slip on this) different. By 1944 the Navy was beginning to have doubts about dive bombing - glide bombing with Hellcats was proving very effective and a lot less dangerous than the new "hot" Helldiver. But as CVLs were expected to serve in fleet actions they might well carry Helldivers. They always carried Hellcats. CVEs carried Avengers (with bombs for ground support: pity more torpedoes weren't around at Leyte) and usually FM-2s, the greatly improved Wildcat. Both of these aircraft were famous for good ground manners and forgiving take-off/landings. One pilot who ferried Avengers from a CVE to a CVL told me that although CVLs were far better protected, it was actually easier to land on a CVE because they were more stable and many were a little wider. In any case, a whole lot of CVEs were in the Pacific. The USN in late 44 was something never seen in history: a kind of gigantic three navy navy. The strike fleet (CVs, CVLs, fast BBs and a cloud of supporting cruisers and destroyers) was intended to sink fleets. A support fleet based around a good number of cruisers, destroyers, old BBs and a growing horde of CVEs was there to support landings. (American admirals had always wondered if they should guard a landing or run from/run after after the enemy fleet up until Saipan. The answer was to build another fleet and do both.) The third fleet was a floating gas station and convenience store that could keep the other two fleets at sea for very long periods. (None of this was especially popular with sailors. Throw in the huge man-made harbors like Manus, and you could be at sea for months - forget about periodic trips to Pearl Harbor unless you were on a sub.) Caused real trouble for the Japanese. Kurita at Samar was under attack by nearly as many aircraft as Nagumo was at Midway - all from CVEs. Of course they weren't trained to sink ships, but it showed the flexibility and numbers behind American sea power.

My bad.

The paint mix given above is for Ed McDonald's Deck Blue (20-B) not Navy Blue (5-B).

Eric

EdGrune

HobbyMan:

It Will Be Interesting To See How Trumpeter Of China  Will React To This Because They Are Ahead Of The Competition.

 

Disagree.   Dragon has already exceeded Trumpeter's  quality in the design & production of ship model kits.  Trumpeter needs to hustle to catch up.  

Trumpeter's ship kits are decidedly hit or miss.    Their destroyer USS The Sullivans is mediocre.   The walkways are raised sidewalks,  the 20mm guns are 10 feet tall,   the 40mm guns are sticks on boxes,  the grilles on the stacks are atrocious,  the torpedo tubes, meh ....   Need I go on?      Conversely, their DE USS England is much better.   Trumpeter's kits are often plagued with gaps and seams.

Dragons destroyer kits; the Buchanan,  Laffey,  and Gearing are better detailed and more accurate than Trumpeter's destroyer.    Dragon includes PE in their kits.   With Trumpeter kits they are an aftermarket purchase.  Dragon's kits include crewmen -- not so from Trumpeter. Dragon's kits fit well with a minimum of tinkering.

The only rap against Dragon's kits,   and if you've built any of their armor kits you may well agree, is their parts count.   Why do something in 5 parts when 20 will do.

I think the problem with Trumpeter is that they became complacent after coming out with models that us modellers raved about. I'm sorry but Dragon is the more agrresive one. They (Dragon) will not be statisfied until they have achieved what they want with their models. I hope to see more of Dragon ship coming out specially  ships that we all wanted to model.

Mansteins revenge

Wow...kit looks cherry---I have the old 700th scale one.  Maybe you'll actually build this thing.  Nahhh...into the stash it goes...

Ah.... the old pot calling the kettle..........

Hi! TRACY:  Hey ,I got the INDEPENDENCE as a CHRISTMAS present from a client. Thank you for what time you took to help them get it right. I opened that box of plastic and did a huge intake of surprised breath !. Everyone is right about the fact that TRUMPETER is resting on their laurels. I already bought another FLETCHER from another mfgr.to correct TRUMPYS mistakes! This carrier is at this writing 1/3 done and I gotta tell you , The only thing I did different was to use some spare photo-etched to replace the finely molded support pieces and such. This is one heckuva kit. I have quite a few of DRAGON,S "Smart Kit Line" and if this is what to expect I will definitely be buying more !! Thanks again ,TRACY for your input to DRAGON on a darned fine kit ! The instructions weren,t perfect ,but ,what can be? Still, great job!   tankerbuilder

Dear Fine Scale Modeler Online Community.

I been trying to post a comment to Jack about the Indiana Jones Topic and obviously he's ignoring me and not paying any Attention! If anyone can send a message to Jack or contact him I Would Want My Question Answered? If not I'm wasting my precious time with Nothing!

Thank You Very Much.

Mr. Hobbyman

bbrowniii

The ad for this ship caught my eye on the back flap of this month's FSM.  A quick search did not yield much in the way of reviews.  Anyone have any feedback on the quality of this kit?

Us here in Asia get them first as I would say because we are nearer to the source. I got mine two months ago. The big box contains "shipload" of parts. Molding is very good if not excellent. It has enough PEs to make a complete model but AM PEs are now in the market as they are saying that there are still areas needing PEs and not included in the kit. But is really looks good. I'm trying to find time away from my other build to be able o concentrate on it. It is a good buy for the money.