hobby boss USS arizona 1/350 BB-39 [1941]

i have to apologise for not finishing this build , it just didn't happen . so I had a go at the 1/200 build which I really enjoyed , probably because I stopped being a sook , and had a go at the PE . which I am slowly getting better at .

GMorrison

 

...

It's all my fault; I was repeating a stupid joke about how color wasn't invented until the late 19th Century because there is no photographic evidence to prove it. My bad.

 

 

I believe it was earlier in that century, and I have seen an image of the result.  It was done by a a famous English scientist, whose name escapes me now, and he used what is now known as the color seperation method.  He exposed three negatives of I believe it was a vase of flowers, each negative through a different color filter.  Then he made a transparency film of each frame, and projected light through them with a different color light to make a slide show type image.  Seems to me he later found a way to dye each positive and stack them.  It may have been Lord Rayleigh.

Only good for very stationary objects, of course.

There is a reason;

       I found out that any model painted Sea Blue Flat or Semi-Gloss disappears to well on the desk and or shelf. I hadn't painted my client's ship when I did the D.E. U.S.S.Butler! Wel,l sad to say I put her away and it took me two months to find her. Sitting right where I left her. In the section of the shelving unit that was painted medium dark blue. She was 1/350 !

       When you paint a model for any reason remember these two words. Scale Effect!, if you remember that on ships, they will come out looking great! Another good fer-instance is the German Cruiser from W.W.1, that REVELL had. If you paint her as summer colors you have to add yellow to the right shade of tan to get the proper color topside. Same with the Oregon or Olympia! Plus those one or two drops of Flat White!

I am using the exact same Eduard PE set on my 1/350 USS Arizona. I found that the Eduard PE set is thicker than Toms Modelworks or other brands. The good of that is once they are shaped they are stronger and tend to stay the shape you bend them to. The bad of it is in several instances I also found it hard to bend them round or in arc's.

As GM states annealing the metal (brass) will make it easier to bend. I chose to use metal and wood dowels of various diameters to help me make the smooth circular shapes. First choose a diameter dowel slightly larger than the arc or circle you want to finish with. The trick is to keep the brass square with the dowel while wrapping it around it. The first attempt will take some of the temper out of the brass. Second I choose a dowel slightly smaller than the desired finish diameter. I find that it will most every time spring back just a little and almost to the exact diameter I want. Of course sometimes there is some fiddling, but the dowel or rod will help you keep the desired shape, even when fiddling or shaping.

If you do not have numerous diameter rod or dowel, look around for items like markers, pens, wire handles for utensils, etc. They will all do the same thing as the rod or dowel. The rest is just feel and practice, but I honestly found that they help me a lot.

Ben 

Sometimes it helps to anneal the brass by getting it really hot over a flame. Softens it up.

steve5

this PE is giving me fits , the straight bits I'm ok with the round stuff screws me up /

as I said the round stuff sucks

Regarding how these gun emplacements are depicted, I think we still see some of the Revell kit's DNA.  That's how they choose to mold the pieces, as pills with a barrel sticking out.  I imagine that the photographic resources they used were only ones that showed the covers in place.

got the anchor chains in

Here is a view of the rear 5” casemates after she was sunk

Regarding the 5" 51's, perhaps the photos I resourced from the book, Battleship Arizona by Paul Stillwell can provide some clarification. 

Read the pictures note carefully

So the 5"-51 broadside guns had both a canvas curtain used during normal instances and a metal shutter system used in heavy weather situations. The canvas was a full curtain while the metal shutters had to be stored and bolted-in by multiple sections to seal against the rubber gaskets thus making it near water tight..

The metal shutters also had port hole windows while the canvas did not. I offer three suggestions for the broadside 5"-51's:

(1) If simulating the canvas cover perhaps you could use masking or painters tape and paint it the sun died lighter shade as shown in the photos. 

(2) If simulating the metal covers may I suggest light scribing of shutter lines and drilling of port hole windows.

(3) If you want to be real aggressive, you can remove the circular numbs on the deck and reconstruct the open gun casement with sheet plastic then purchase some 1/350 5"-51's from anohter source, example "Shapeways", or?

What ever you choose I'm sure it will come out nice. Keep up the great work, she is looking really good so far.

As for my 1/350 Arizona in the US GB thread, I chose to use the canvas cover method. There is too much more to correct and shape versus spending the time opening the broadside gun casements (IMHO). I must admit that the larger scale Arizona does look good showing those 5"-51's off in the open casement though....

v/r,

Ben

got some more work done

Another point is that the gun mounts were closer to the outer bulkhead than they would appear to be in the model kits. In actuallity, those guns in the bow and stern could point directly fore or aft depending on their location. Now, of course, the mid ships 5"-51's could not.

Brian

what do you mean by "which look would be harder to scratch" as in pre 1929-31 modernization or post modernization?

the Baron

Actually, the Pennsylvanias were laid down only a couple of years after the Texases ... The positions in between were just plated over, following the lines of the hull.

Funny you phrase it that way, the Class was called New York, despite Texas being laid down, and launched first.

The two Nevada's also informed the Pennsylvannia class construction.

The closed in forward casemate mounts on Texas were incorporated into Texas' Wardroom.  The port side of which was where one of the German 20cm shells fired at Normandy struck Texas, Jun 1944 (the other struck the pilothouse and inflicted casualties).

In looking at plans of Arizona, she's drawn to have segmented panels with 11.25" airports, describing partial arcs around each of the 5"51s.  But they were not round as the kit depicts.  The spaces areounf the guns were crew berthing in hammocks

Not sure which "look" would be harder to scratch.

CapnMac82

BB-35 USS Texas had started life with "casemated" 5"51 on the second deck.  They were fitted out with the metal shutters and portholes, as they backed up into various compartments.  I want to remember that they were as tin as 1/8", but that could be faulty memory.

They were not water-tight and a real source of annoyance.  So, spanning 4 separate refits, they were all moved up to the Main deck as part of the superstructure.

To my knowledge, once part of the "main castle" they do not appear to have ever had weather protection.  

There may have been provision for a canvas dodger, outboard, but I never saw a sign of it on any of my in-person visits.

All of which invites me to wonder about Arizona, built well afer Texas, and using lessons learned from previous ships. 

Actually, the Pennsylvanias were laid down only a couple of years after the Texases, but yes, they had the same casemated 5" guns mounted in positions below the main deck, and those were removed.  You're right-according to accounts from the crews, those stations were "very wet."  They were closed over and those guns were relocated to the deck house, one deck up.  The positions furthest forward and aft could still be seen, since the plating followed the old casemate shape.  The positions in between were just plated over, following the lines of the hull.

BB-35 USS Texas had started life with "casemated" 5"51 on the second deck.  They were fitted out with the metal shutters and portholes, as they backed up into various compartments.  I want to remember that they were as tin as 1/8", but that could be faulty memory.

They were not water-tight and a real source of annoyance.  So, spanning 4 separate refits, they were all moved up to the Main deck as part of the superstructure.

To my knowledge, once part of the "main castle" they do not appear to have ever had weather protection.  

There may have been provision for a canvas dodger, outboard, but I never saw a sign of it on any of my in-person visits.

All of which invites me to wonder about Arizona, built well afer Texas, and using lessons learned from previous ships.

thanks for your input ddp59 , unfortunately I can't use them , I would have to get 2 set's and I have spent enough on this kit as it is mate . the one's on the ship are good enough for my purposes , love the photo too .

Or wood on many ships. They had to be lifted out and stowed, big ones would get pretty heavy.

Nice photo.

was metal plates because of the port holes.

http://navsource.org/archives/01/039/013945.jpg

ddp59

those 5" guns are not turrets as should look like this. http://www.3dmodelparts.com/1-350-5-inch-51-caliber-guns-8-pcs/ 

Yes, weren't the ones installed in the deck house protected with detachable canvas sheets?  And when those sheets, or covers, were in place, they'd look like solid bulkheads?

those 5" guns are not turrets as should look like this. http://www.3dmodelparts.com/1-350-5-inch-51-caliber-guns-8-pcs/

had another go at the hull , this suit's my eye better .

I knew Massimo Vignelli, who designed the classic ligatured AA logo. Pilots Union made them include the eagle. He was an instructor at Harvard Design School.

Bloomingdales logo and many other classics.

Tanker-Builder

I always liked American, Red, White and Blue over Natural metal

The current AA uses a pale gray fuse and natural metal wings, the tail has alternating white and red stipes.  It's a blend of the US Air scheme and AA's old scheme.  That latter being natural metal fuse with a stripe of white and blue over the windows and painted wings and tail.

For OP, do not forget that Arizona had about a 6 foot black boot topping, which would run from LWL -2' to LWL + 4' with those lines parallel to the water line.  So you can't just use tape 0.205" wide.

cheers for that ddp59 , will try to adjust .

TB - ?

Hmmm;

 I always liked American, Red, White and Blue over Natural metal

too high. look at this link. http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/BB39/BOGP/RG19AlphaArizona162285-2_a.jpg

that was good reading , thanks for the history lesson mate .

I have painted the hull , is this blue a close variant ? and does the hull red look a little high , I'm am no historian , that's why I like listening to you guy's .

This doesnt help the coloring questions. But rather a neat bit of history surrounding the Arizona and the attack on Pearl Harbor. There was a couple with the last name of Oberg that had a bought a color film camera to capture their life together.

The husband was in the Army and got stationed to Pearl Harbor not long before the attack. When the attack took place he rushed to help. His wife grabbed the camera and started filming.

You can find the video on youtube by searching Oberg color film footage of Pearl Harbor. Although you never really directly see the ships in the harbor, they were close enough to capture the smoke and stuff from the ships being hit.

Quite an interesting story with a good history. To date, I believe this was the only colored filmed footage of the attack.

OP, love what you are doing with this kit, Keep it up!

White/ Dark Blue/ Red

I did too, UAL. My Dad was colorblind.

My F-in-Law spent 1943-1944 flying in a Beaufighter in the MTO. 

USAAF reverse lend-lease. 

I built him a model working from b/w photographs.

Two tone camo.

"What color was it?".

"I don't know. I was too busy climbing in and out of the damn thing".

CapnMac82

 

 

kustommodeller1.2

Why is there no one, at all, who can say with 100% certainty,

 

 

If you ask people in criminal justice, there are few things as reliably unreliable as "eyewitness testimony."  And, the further back in time a recollection is the less reliable it becomes.  This is reduced with Subject Matter Experts, but not eliminated.

Around the Navy base the locals, such as they were (Hawai'i did not become an exotic tourist attraction until the late 50s) were used to seeing gray navy ships.  And for many decades, too.  In 1940, they started in with the darker camo schemes, even blue dark enough to be black.  Remember, too, the locals were also used to merchant vessels in every color, too.  Ships were colorful.

Consider how few remember the painting of the turret tops.

Then, in all the time passing, the ships became gray again.

Quick, try and remember what color Delta aircraft are painted.

 

Delta is boring... Southwest has purple fuselage and Orange stripes... that is memorable... TWA, White with Red trim, Pan Am White with Blue trim... American had NMF with Red, White, and Blue livery...

No offense to Delta personnel... I grew up in a TWA household and airlines were a big part of my youth.

kustommodeller1.2

Why is there no one, at all, who can say with 100% certainty,

If you ask people in criminal justice, there are few things as reliably unreliable as "eyewitness testimony."  And, the further back in time a recollection is the less reliable it becomes.  This is reduced with Subject Matter Experts, but not eliminated.

Around the Navy base the locals, such as they were (Hawai'i did not become an exotic tourist attraction until the late 50s) were used to seeing gray navy ships.  And for many decades, too.  In 1940, they started in with the darker camo schemes, even blue dark enough to be black.  Remember, too, the locals were also used to merchant vessels in every color, too.  Ships were colorful.

Consider how few remember the painting of the turret tops.

Then, in all the time passing, the ships became gray again.

Quick, try and remember what color Delta aircraft are painted.

Bill;

     I am going to say your right. I too believe she was in process. Admiral King wasn't really woried about it. Get her done and then we'll leave for a patrol. I have heard that someone tried to get a computer to read the little dots that was print back then, in photos and still didn't get a proper decision.

It would take a written record and some photographs that were demonstrably color correct, to be 100% certain.

Peoples memories aren't much of a help.

I think the conclusion is at about 90% right now.

 FWIW, my thought is that she was being painted at the time.

Bill

I have always  been curious. There were litterally thousands of people who were regulars around Honolulu and Pearl for years who didn't perish in the Pearl Harbor attack. Arizona was a little large to be kept indoors out of public view. Big. Bold. Beautiful.

Why is there no one, at all, who can say with 100% certainty, that BB-39 was either blue or grey in the first week of December? (head scratch)

Should be added to the list of wrold's greatest mysteries.

It was a joke. 

"Color"hadn't been invented yet, judging from the preponderance of b/w photos.

"Color film" of course had.

GMorrison

Vestal anchored next to her port side. Too bad color hadn't been invented yet...

 

Actually, it had been around for quite awhile.  US was a bit slow adapting it.  There was a show, either PBS or History channel, of the best color movie shots from WW2.

finally able to get some primer on her

hi everybody , sorry I was gone for so long , but I just wasn't enjoying modeling that much , and with not recieving emails and the covet19 , this got put on the shelf of doom . over the sulk's now , I got it down from the shelf and found it had suffered a bit of a bump and one of the smaller turrets has disappeared, so I had to make another one and all the PE walls had fallen off . so of to brisbane tomorrow for supplies as we are able to do a bit of traveling now . will post some pic's when able .

it seems I have accidentally muted myself from my own build , am I able to reverse this please .

That was taken by Dr. Haakenson on board USS Solace. The original 8mm film was in color. The Navy department made a black and white copy for study and now only a few stills from the color film exist.

Steve5, How is this build going?

I haven't seen an update for a long time. I really like the PE work your doing as it will really bring this ship to a new level. 

I'm starting this kit for a American Ship GB. I also purchased the metal barrels along with both Eduard and Toms Model Works PE sets. 

I am looking forward to your update. Is there anything since your last update I should know. 

Ben

ddp59 and Model Monkey,

     Thank You.  Those Pics and Post tell the story.

     Separate elevation as per the photo's. 

      I missed the fact of the 2-gun turrets being different. So NY and NV class could elevate those individually.  So only Triple turrets on NV and PA class could not elevate seperately.

 Also, I only meant the 14"/45 BB's.  All 16" guns could elevate individually.

  Correction Much Appreciated!

          Nino

P.S. I did indicate Colorado could elevate individial guns.  My previous post:  "For ..., Colorado, ...(and newer bb's), Trunnion pressue when firing is listed per gun meaning each gun barrel can be elevated/fired, separately.

Nino, New York's main guns can individually elevate. also the Colorado class had twin 16" gun turrets not triple 14".

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013401e.jpg

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/013424.jpg

Texas

http://navsource.org/archives/01/035/013512t.jpg

http://navsource.org/archives/01/035/013534.jpg

Excellent work!  Really enjoying your build.

Yes, concur with the above posts: barrels mounted together on a single sleeve.

Oddly, Nevada's and Oklahoma's twin-gun turrets' guns could elevate independently.  Like Arizona, their triple-gun turrets could not.  The succeeding New Mexico class had 3-gun turrets with guns that could elevate independently. 

Perhaps putting the guns together in a single sleeve saved space and weight.

Photos indicate Arizona's turrets had a feature that was not present on elder sistership Pennsylvania's turrets.  Arizona's turrets had oval access plates on the external ventilation trunks.  Pennsylvania's did not have the access plates.  Nevada's and Oklahoma's triple-gun turrets did not have external vent trunks.  It seems that as each successive ship was built, a new feature was introduced.

As Dr. McCoy says, "I know engineers, they love to change things."

 I dug out my references for BB-38 regarding the turrets.

EDIT:  My remarkes below are for 3-gun turrets. Please disregard my reference to NY class and the 2-gun turrets on the NV class.

The same 14-inch/45 caliber guns were installed on New York-class, Nevada-class, and Pennsylvania-class battleships. On these BB's the trunnion and all guns in a (3-gun turret) Turret were one unit ,meaning guns could not elevate separately.

 New Mexico , Coloradoo , and Tennessee-class battleships  featured the first "three-gun" turrets, meaning that each gun in each turret could be "individually sleeved" to elevate separately.

Except that as I mentioned before, the Pennsylvania class ships did not do that. There was a big solid piece of steel that held them together at the same angle.

Thgere's a photo of it in Stllwell, but I can't find my copy right now.

I think the modeler has said that in those photos they are loose fitted, not glued in yet.

Nino

 

 

 

steve5

just starting to see what I'm getting myself into . 38 pieces of PE , plus 12 barrel's .

 

 

 

 

 

     The metal barrels look super.   I do note that in your picture they are set to different elevations as if they could be elevated/depressed separately from adjacent barrels in the same turret.  I think that may be wrong.  I was of the opinion that all 3 barrels in a BB-38 and BB-39 turret were set to same elevation on all 3 barrels.   Guess we need a Pennsylvania class expert to answer this one.  

   Something to consider before you use glue!

   Nino

( My hand written notes that I have in my old Dragon Pennsylvania  kit box says "...the guns could not elevate independently".  Not a reference I would bet the farm on but something that will need to be confirmed.)

 

 

 

Actually The gimick Trumpeter used for the Arizona's barrels is suprisingly accurate it actually allows you to pose the barrels at different elevations seperately. Which means you can pose all guns elevated to firing position or you can pose two barrels in post firing(loading) position with the last gun in the turret firing.

I've updated my CL-52 build (hull) over on my WIP thread.

As far as BB-39 is concerned, Steve5 you need to rent "Here Comes The Navy".

Sorry to hijack, or pirate more appropriate, this thread.

Just finished a book about 19th Century merchant ship design. Unlike the Navy, they pay taxes and the tonnage is entirely a formula based on just a handful of overall dimensions.

The art was in building a beamy ship with convex bows that could still sail reasonably fast.

It was seriously thought that deeper ships sailed faster.

CapnMac82

The CL(AA) were taught at Newport because, as over-sized destroyers, they had pretty dramatic stability equations.  The CLs had more beam and did not produce the same sort of head-desking equations.

My Basic Naval Architecture class at CGA used the DD-692 (long hull).  I still have the book and the graphs -  for solving tons per inch immersion/stability problems...

CapnMac82

Displacement tonnage is base on volume, not weight; adding and subtracting weight gets complicated.

In the case of an Atlanta, your expendables are all the bunker fuel, all the ammo (5", 40mm, 20mm, and torpedoes), potable water, food stuffs, and all the spares.

The CL(AA) were taught at Newport becasue, as over-sized destroyers, they had pretty dramatic stability equations.  The CLs had more beam and did not produce the same sort of head-desking equations.

 

The 100 pounds/ sailor wasn't the warm body; it's the expendables and it's a low estimate.

Displacement tonnage is base on volume, not weight; adding and subtracting weight gets complicated.

In the case of an Atlanta, your expendables are all the bunker fuel, all the ammo (5", 40mm, 20mm, and torpedoes), potable water, food stuffs, and all the spares.

The CL(AA) were taught at Newport becasue, as over-sized destroyers, they had pretty dramatic stability equations.  The CLs had more beam and did not produce the same sort of head-desking equations.

You're right.

gmorrison

I followed your logic until the end. When you divided pounds to get tons I think you dropped zeros. So instead of 16 tons of ammunition it should be 160 tons and for the crew instead of 5 tons, 50 tons. Also I think the average weight of a crew member should probably be 150 lbs not 100.

One last comment. In the case of my ship (at a much later date) the magazines were always kept full only being topped off for ammunition expended in practice shoots. Since we were using ammo left over from WWII we were encouraged to use as much as we wanted. In the case of the Atlanta I would expect it would return from a battle with a reserve  still in the magazines and be immediately rearmed so it was ready for the next one.

CapnMac82

Somewhere in my pile of refernce material is a guidline to boot topping widths, which was by class/size of ships.

I'd really like to know what that manual is, because it flies in the face of the technical documentation I've read.

since this subject has come up , I have decided to glue the two halve's together , thought it would be pretty simple , but they didn't line too well . the top halve was a bit wider than the bottom , it has taken a bit of sanding to get it too primer stage , [ that's next ] it will still need a fair bit of work after that .

Well you caught me. I think 6' is the deal for a big BB but it seemed a little beyond- memory fails.

It's hard to paint the stripe while afloat, and to be anywhere below light would be impossible.

Interesting though, and again not as big a deal on BB-39 as on my current builds the CL's.

Ammunition was loaded in advance of a mission, not much before. An Atlanta Class CL had 16 5" guns and each had 200 rounds on board for a battle. That's 3200 rounds at 100 pounds or so each, 320,000 pounds.

That equates to 16 tons, which on a 5,000 ton displacement ship is a 0.3% difference. Assuming 20 foot freeboard, thats about 9".

Add 100 pounds per sailor (1,000) another 5 tons or 2-3".

Then fuel.

You get 24" or so of difference. 

GMorrison

Its wider than you think, maybe 4 feet or so

Somewhere in my pile of refernce material is a guidline to boot topping widths, which was by class/size of ships.

And, IIRC, the widths are a guideline, as it mentions that ships at sea benefit from wider boot topping than ships largely in harbors in peacetime.

I want to say that battleships were recommended a 6' boot topping, as that allowed a lot of steaming (and using up expendibles) whitout showing any read bottom paint.

During wartime the boot topping width was doubled, as ships were more likely to expend ammo as well as ordinary expendibles; also to cruise to much more extended range.

The wider boot topping was also considered to help confuse exactly where i nthe water the ship was, which would confuse the range estimate.

The captain of the ship was the final arbiter of just where the boot topping started and stopped viz-a-viz load waterline.  Some captains would go 1/3 and 2/3; some 1/2 & 1/2.  Often, this was set out during dry docking when a ship would be at its lightest.  Weld lines would be scribed on the hull to guide painting layout (the hull numbers & name were similarly scribed).

6' at 1/350 is 0.205" (5.22mm)

thank's gene mate , will be using MM & tamiya paint's .

Steve, you are one of the best & your photo etch is really super. That is a beautiful PE set & you work on it looks perfect. What kind of paint did you decide on. 

                                                                  Gene

rcboater

 

 

GMorrison

Yes, that's a flaw on several Trumpeter kits. 

 

 

 

GM,

Is that really a “flaw”?  I thought it was a “feature”!  

The problem with most waterline hulls is that you that you can‘t show the model on anything other than a perfectly flat calm sea.  Having some extra hull material would allow you to show the subject underway, with some wave and wake action sculpted into the display base‘s “sea”.

 

-Bill

 

 

 

Or worse, I’m building a Dragon CL and the waterline version is ok, but the separate lower hull half is a good 15’ too shallow. It’s going to require a insert.

thanks gmorrison for the help in the math's , alway's was only average at that . I wasn't sure how I would go at the PE . seem to be bumbling through , will try the annealing process , and see what happen's after that regarding painting and gluing . as I will have to heat up the PE first and I don't think acrylic like's naked flames , or laqueur , enamel for that fact . but I appreciate the input .

GMorrison

Yes, that's a flaw on several Trumpeter kits. 

GM,

Is that really a “flaw”?  I thought it was a “feature”!  

The problem with most waterline hulls is that you that you can‘t show the model on anything other than a perfectly flat calm sea.  Having some extra hull material would allow you to show the subject underway, with some wave and wake action sculpted into the display base‘s “sea”.

-Bill

10 feet at 1/350 scale is 1/35 of a foot. Which is about 1/3 of an inch.

Round down a little to match the range Tracy noted- call it 5/16”.

Now there’s a black stripe at the waterline, the boot topping.  

Its wider than you think, maybe 4 feet or so. I’d be interested to hear the opinions on that. It’s a bit of a painting clenched as well, since it’s top and bottom edges are on level lines and it’s true dimension varies as the hull slope changes.

This does look very nice. 

May I make a couple of suggestions?

Assuming these are not test fit pictures. One real challenge of building complex warships at smaller scales is painting them. 

PE should be primed up front, either while still flat or at least before installing. ESP. With acrylic paint final colors.

This particular ship had vertical and horizontal surfaces painted two colors that are very close, but not identical, and in many cases the deck was a different linoleum color, or natural wood.

Later in the war the verticals of USN ships changed a lot, while the decks stayed mostly blue.

It is very hard to paint all of that once railings are installed. 

However much you can pre-paint, the better.

Hey Steve, that funnel looks awesome. Nice work bending and fitting all that. It looks really good! Yeah, look into annealing because it might make your job easier. It helps to keep the metal from kinking, allowing a person to achieve smoother curves.

thank's michael , I am going to have to practise my bending of the PE . it isn't great . I have heard about annealing the brass , might try it . after I watch some you tube .

Steve,

Such fine detail at such a small scale, looking good there mate, can't wait to see her finished.

Michael D.

the funnel

got some guns done ,

thanks tracy , as my maths isn't that great how much higher should I put the water line ?

Yes, that's a flaw on several Trumpeter kits. 

On BB-39, the rifles were set in threes at the same elevation.

One point to consider. The upper/lower hull isn't broken along Arizona's actual waterline, so if you don't paint or repaint following the break between pieces she'll be 8-10 scale feet too high out of the water.

thank's gentlemen

gmorrison - will have another look at them . I was Pretty tired whenI finished .

nino - I haven't set them in yet , was waiting till I fixed them on the deck before gluing them in position .

steve5

just starting to see what I'm getting myself into . 38 pieces of PE , plus 12 barrel's .

 

     The metal barrels look super.   I do note that in your picture they are set to different elevations as if they could be elevated/depressed separately from adjacent barrels in the same turret.  I think that may be wrong.  I was of the opinion that all 3 barrels in a BB-38 and BB-39 turret were set to same elevation on all 3 barrels.   Guess we need a Pennsylvania class expert to answer this one.  

   Something to consider before you use glue!

   Nino

It's probably the lens fisheye, but the barrels don't look parallel to me. Try making a pattern that had three truly parallel lines to adjust if you need to.

But it looks so good! Looks cool, Steve. Watching and learning.

just starting to see what I'm getting myself into . 38 pieces of PE , plus 12 barrel's .

steve5

I doubt anyone will ever look though . 

 

thanks steve , no they are only partially bored out . but I doubt anyone will ever look though . 

Hey Steve, those gun barrels look great. I think it was worth the wait! I can imagine they are more pristine than the plastic supplied parts. A dumb question for you. Are they cored out? Or partially? It is hard to tell from the pics.

Your project is moving along nicely. 

thanks steve , nino , really enjoy your comments .

finally recieved my barrels from masters , only took 5 weeks , nice job aussie post . I really think they make a difference . 

Steve,

  Like Steve said, "I am enjoying your build, ...Keep up the good work!" !

I made a tiny jar of that Spruegoo.  Much better than filling gaps with Superglue, at least for me.  It sands the same as the kit plastic or at least more evenly that dried CA.

     Jim.

P.S.  Nice fill job on the bow since I can't even see where you did it.

steve5

they mentioned the little dip in the bow , wish I took a pic of it , so I tried some spruegoo , shown to me by baxter , worked like a charm , all better after sanding . thank's steve .

Hey Steve! Thanks for letting us know that spruegoo worked well for you. I think you will find that the more you use it--the more you like it. 

I am enjoying your build, Steve. Keep up the good work!!

was looking at a few builds on you-tube , and they mentioned the little dip in the bow , wish I took a pic of it , so I tried some spruegoo , shown to me by baxter , worked like a charm , all better after sanding . thank's steve .

I have to agree with everyone. The PE, barrels, and deck sets will really bring this kit to another level. The verticles along with the stairs versus the plastic lumps are going to go a long way by themselves. The wood deck to cover the seams will be a big plus too. I think you will find that the PE will help the superstructure a lot as well. The catapult will be light years better than the kit part, etc., etc.

How hard was it for you to remove the molded in deck details?

What did you find out concerning the lower hull by the props, is it miss-shapened?

Ben

I agree with stik....nice start on her.  I promise, you will find a lot of new language skills with all the PE you have.

steve5

 

 

I didn't know any PE sets included upgrades for the vertical surfaces! For me, those horizontal seams along each deck part are probably the worst part of this kit.  I didn't address them, in my Pennsylvania build; I just applied Mr Surfacer but otherwise lived with them.  Part of that was my thought that if I wanted to address them, I'd have to cut styrene sheet or strip to cover those surfaces, and then go back and drill out the portholes.  I have a similar issue with the window framing on the foremast decks, too-such soft detail, with frames that should be square.

Those PE pieces really improve the look of the kit!  That is just so much better than the stock kit parts.

That looks real good! Especially that wood deck. The PE sure helps a lot too.

tried out the wood deck , fits well , saw two little dent's on the bow had to be filled , and a seam had to be removed , had a play with the P.E. , gee this stuff is small 

Hi Steve, I have never used rubbing alcohol, but if GM says it is OK, I am sure it is. It is that years ago someone wrote about using Denatured Alcohol & I am slow to change, because it works. I bought a couple bottles of Tamiya thinner & did not like it. It seemed to dry in the bottle way faster.

  You have everything for the Arizona to make it look good. I built it years ago & ended up selling it. I would like to build another. Most all my friends were WW2 veterans when I was young.  I got all kinds of direct information about model building from them.

Don't know if you can get ethol alcahol here over the counter , but l do have 100/  isopropyl will have to try it , thanks gmorrison

I have used isopropyl alcohol with good results. It's sold as "rubbing" alchohol. The trick is to minimize the impurities in it, so I use the 90% solution.

steve5

gene - thanks for the tip on MM paint's , will have to think of something mate . never heard of denatured alcahol . that book sounds like a good read .

Denatured alcohol (in the States) is ethyl alcohol, high proof, with a poisonous substance added so that the alcohol cannot/should not be drunk.  It is a hardware store item.   I have used Expo Dry Erase board cleaner for the same purpose of thinning Tamiya paints. 

You could probably substitute Gin or Vodka but Whisky would be a waste

For an out of the bottle acrylic 5S Sea Blue paint AK Interactive has that color in one of their US Navy Camouflage paint sets.  See the recent discussion thread on naval paints

thankyou gentlemen , boy talk about pressure  , I have to put this build on hold for a little while , I have to fly down to adelaide , for family reasons . still a bit worried about the PE . really haven't done too much of it  , but one must try .

docidle- steve , unfortunately my wife has only one good lung , and we live in a cottage style house , so no enamels sorry mate . but I will be going with a colour i like , being old an all 

gene - thanks for the tip on MM paint's , will have to think of something mate . never heard of denatured alcahol . that book sounds like a good read .

Steve I am anxious to watch your Arizona. You are a great builder, one of the best. Watch using any MM where you have to mask. Nearly every time I have used it , it has peeled off with the masking tape. They have great colors, but I have about stopped using it as it not only peels, but dries in the bottle fast & clogs my airbrush. I love Tamiya & have no problem with it. 

    I thin my Tamiya with denatured alcohol & it works way better than Tamiyas thinner. I have been doing that for years. With the black boot stripe , you have to mask. I often don;t prime Tamiya.

  I am too old to change paints because there is a learning process.

       Off the subject, I am reading Shinano, bythe Archerfish's Captain, Joe Enright. It is about the US sub that sank the Jap 70,000 ton carrier Shinano. Anyone with any interest in WW2 & subs would really enjoy it. I got it for $10 shipped on ebay. The Japs had turned the Yamato's sister ship into a carrier. 

Steve I am anxious to watch your Arizona. You are a great builder, one of the best. Watch using any MM where you have to mask. Nearly every time I have used it , it has peeled off with the masking tape. They have great colors, but I have about stopped using it as it not only peels, but dries in the bottle fast & clogs my airbrush. I love Tamiya & have no problem with it. 

    I thin my Tamiya with denatured alcohol & it works way better than Tamiyas thinner. I have been doing that for years. With the black boot stripe , you have to mask. I often don;t prime Tamiya.

  I am too old to change paints because there is a learning process.

       Off the subject, I am reading Shinano, bythe Archerfish's Captain, Joe Enright. It is about the US sub that sank the Jap 70,000 ton carrier Shinano. Anyone with any interest in WW2 & subs would really enjoy it. I got it for $10 shipped on ebay. The Japs had turned the Yamato's sister ship into a carrier. 

Steve,

I’m pulling up a chair on this one. Just my two cents, but I’ve been using ColourCoat paints more and more lately. Granted, it’s more cleanup but there’s something really satisfying about using enamels again, at least for me.

The other thing I really like is that I’m not trying to match colors with the different brands. After 35 years of creating and matching colors, I must be getting lazy in my old age.

As I said, just my two cents bud.

Steve

goldhammer

Steve- you seem to suffer the same afflliction as the rest of us....can't leave well enough alone.Embarrassed

That sure does hit home. Speaking of me, I mean.

Steve, I'll be keeping an eye on this too, been  decades since building a ship, let alone a warship.

Steve-  you seem to suffer the same afflliction as the rest of us....can't leave well enough alone.

All the goodies will add to her, good on ya!

As an aside take a look back out on the gallery page...a beautiful rendition of the Trumpy 1/200 in a store in Arizona.

Nino- Remembered seeing that division chart before.  Thanks for pulling it out of the files.

steve5

"...then I thought a bit of PE can't hurt . I thought I was only getting I sheet , so surprised to see this lot and I'm getting worried , so then I had get the metal barrels and pedestals , this couple of weeks build has suddenly turned into about a 6 month build sssheesh .

as a side note my LHS , said MM musn't be making sea blue anymore . no corresponding number here in aust . so I got some dark sea blue instead and will lighten it with some flat white , see what happens .

     No not 6 months,  a bit more.  235 days till & December 7.   There's a date you can shoot for.

 I think that's more PE than I have bought in the entire last year. Fortunately it's 1/350 so you have a better chance of finding it in the carpet.

That 5-N and 5-S were pretty dark.  I think most folks who used 5-N out of the bottle found it to be too dark for the scale.  I know TankerBuilder and I both knocked models to the floor when that Camo color (& 20-B on the deck), hid our respective models during a simple reach across the desk.  Yep, Camouflaged.  Go with Lighter as you mentioned.

How is the Stern hull at the area near the Props?  Is it a bit concave?  I do not have the kit but  I understand it is somewhat of a copy of Revells Original Arizona and it did have that 1 major hull error.

      Jim

Steve, I have this kit as well. I will be watching your build with a personal interest. I, like, you, have already purchased the wood deck and numerous PE as well as barrels. Your efforts will be a great opportunity for me to learn through proxy what it is all about.

Popping the popcorn and sitting on this one...

Ben

Steve those accessories are going to add so much to the finished look, time to roll up the sleeves there mate!, cheers.

Michael D.

thank's nino , that will come in handy mate . well so much for out of the box .!

found the wood deck at a great price so I thought why not . then I thought a bit of PE can't hurt . I thought I was only getting I sheet , so surprised to see this lot and I'm getting worried , so then I had get the metal barrels and pedestals , this couple of weeks build has suddenly turned into about a 6 month build sssheesh .

as a side note my LHS , said MM musn't be making sea blue anymore . no corresponding number here in aust . so I got some dark sea blue instead and will lighten it with some flat white , see what happens .

love it goldhammer

The turret tops were division colors and what position she was in the division.  Made it easier to identify from the spotter aircraft.

I believe #3 was not painted because of the cat on top of it.

nino , I take it you mean these turret's and no1 is forward most , do you know why no 3 was left grey ? is tamiya XF 7 ok for the red . ?

I have the 1/350 Arizona in the stash.  Looked it over and it reminded me strongly of the old Revell kit, and relatively uncomplicated.

I remember reading that. There were other tells, I think the A/B turret spacing was comparably wrong on both. 

GMorrison

Both scales models come from Trumpeter companies, the bigger from Banner and the smaller from Mini Hobby Models. I have the bigger model in the stash because it was onsale cheap, but I've never had any real desire to put any time on it. Old Trumpeter kits are not usually very nice.

I would probably build the 1/700 Dragon kit if I ever built a Pennsylvania.

I remember reading that Banner derived its kit from Revell's.  The engineering certainly suggests it, especially in the way the decks are assembled with the horizontal seams.  I'll find the article again and link it back here.

As for building a Pennsy, I want her in her pre-war configuration, mid-Thirties.  That's why I picked up the HobbyBoss 1/700 kit.  That, and that it was cheap, ten bucks.

Steve, I’ll be happy to help, however I can. 

One suggestion, if you’re going to use Tamiya Hull Red, that is actually the IJN shade and is darker and more brown than the USN shade Get yourself some Tamiya Flat Red to add and lighten it up to the USN color.

nino , forgot to thank you for the colour choice's , cheer's mate

ridleusmc , will look into those colour's as well my friend .

thank's for the well wish's guy's .

GM , I found a PE fret for this model and ordered it , from eduard , also am going to get some tamiya XF9 hull red .

michael , sorry about the victory I will going back to it , but needed a rest , as I was nearly 2 years on what I had done .

baxter , cheer's mate , what have you been up to lately ?

 stik , thank's for the photo mate , think I am going to need a bit more info from you in the future mate .

TB ,  will have a look at adding a couple of drop's of white , thank's

I don't usually use AK Interactive paints, but this set seems to fulfill my naval paint requirements.  

https://ak-interactive.com/product/us-navy-camouflages/

I've considered purchasing this set as well.

https://ak-interactive.com/product/us-navy-camouflage-vol-2/

I like the fact that they are labeled with the historic Naval specs (such as 5-N Navy Blue and the like).  They are fairly easy to use.  They can be airbrushed straight from the bottle, or painted by brush.  Tamiya is my go-to brand, but I find it easier to use these paints instead of trying to match shades.  

I should mention the downsides.  They're expensive.  Their coverage ability requires multiple coats.    

Hey Steve, I will be watching. Looks like an interesting build.

Good luck Mate.

stikpusher

If you’re building Arizona in her final fit as at Pearl Harbor, you’ll need to modify the kit. The kit has the boom masts on her forward fighting top, which had been replaced with a lattice type by the time of the attack. The kit has her 1930’s masts.

Steve, you really do want to paint the bottom.

Hi Steve,

Glad to see you back at it, although was hoping for an update on the Victory, but I get the need to shift gears to something less time consuming. Looking forward to this build

Michael D.

If you’re building Arizona in her final fit as at Pearl Harbor, you’ll need to modify the kit. The kit has the boom masts on her forward fighting top, which had been replaced with a lattice type by the time of the attack. The kit has her 1930’s masts.

Hi;

 I painted my clients model MM Sea Blue modified with a few drops of white .The Blue right out of the bottle is too dark . T.B.

thankyou gentlemen , the reason I asked is it's a round trip of about 400 odd k's to my LHS . you have given me something to think about , as I have never done a modern ship , even a 1915 one is modern to what I have been building . stik , love that cartoon , reminded me of my old man .

I've dry fitted the hull together , the red antifouling doesn't look too bad . but I think I will still paint it .

 drilled out the barrels with a .7mm bit , the holes actually look bigger in real life .

I knew where you were coming from GM...

stikpusher

 

 

the Baron

 

 

stikpusher

...In Japan... the guy who recorded her death blow did so with a home movie camera and color film...

 

 

 

That's a Japanese photo, Stik?  I never knew that.  It looks like it was shot from ground level, on Ford Island.

Or are you kiddin' around?

 

 

 

 

No, I phrased that poorly... the color footage of Arizona exploding was filmed by an American, I believe an officer, on a ship in the East Loch. I was being facetious on Japan not having color film at the time. But I have yet to come across any actual confirmed Japanese color photography from WWII or before. Both Germany with Agfa, and the US with Kodak, had color motion picture and still film commercially available from pre war times. I don’t think that I’ve seen any pre war or wartime color photos or film of Soviet origin either...

 

Both scales models come from Trumpeter companies, the bigger from Banner and the smaller from Mini Hobby Models. I have the bigger model in the stash because it was onsale cheap, but I've never had any real desire to put any time on it. Old Trumpeter kits are not usually very nice.

I would probably build the 1/700 Dragon kit if I ever built a Pennsylvania.

the Baron

 

 

stikpusher

...In Japan... the guy who recorded her death blow did so with a home movie camera and color film...

 

 

 

That's a Japanese photo, Stik?  I never knew that.  It looks like it was shot from ground level, on Ford Island.

Or are you kiddin' around?

 

No, I phrased that poorly... the color footage of Arizona exploding was filmed by an American, I believe an officer, on a ship in the East Loch. I was being facetious on Japan not having color film at the time. But I have yet to come across any actual confirmed Japanese color photography from WWII or before. Both Germany with Agfa, and the US with Kodak, had color motion picture and still film commercially available from pre war times. I don’t think that I’ve seen any pre war or wartime color photos or film of Soviet origin either...

Not related to interpreting the color callouts, but how is this kit?  I have the 1/700 scale version, and I wonder if HobbyBoss just pantographed the 1/700 sprues up to 1/350, or if it's a different, and better, more detailed tooling than the smaller kit.

I've been building the kit to convert it into the Pennsylvania circa 1935. I was fired up for the project when I started, but as I got into it, I lost interest, because it's not a very good kit.  It's DNA goes back to Revell's Arizona, and it suffers from soft details and poor engineering.

stikpusher

...In Japan... the guy who recorded her death blow did so with a home movie camera and color film...

That's a Japanese photo, Stik?  I never knew that.  It looks like it was shot from ground level, on Ford Island.

Or are you kiddin' around?

GMorrison

Vestal anchored next to her port side. Too bad color hadn't been invented yet...

 

In Japan... the guy who recorded her death blow did so with a home movie camera and color film...

Vestal anchored next to her port side. Too bad color hadn't been invented yet...

Just for reference, here is probably the last overhead photo of her taken before she took the catastrophic hit.

Hi Steve!

 You are about to open old wounds.

Kidding  'bout the "wounds" but throw out that recommended color chart IMHO.

 But if you really wanna...

Here is the Primary link I use if I have a question on matching paint:

http://www.shapeshift.bg/paintconversionlinks.html

  The individual links I like are these:

http://www.shapeshift.bg/paintconversionlinks.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20081223121956/http://www.aoou52.dsl.pipex.com/Models/humbrol-standards.htm

http://www.creativemodels.co.uk/paint_conversion.php/manufacturers_id/12/page/1

https://web.archive.org/web/20180414100304/http://www.miniatures.de/colour-federal-standard-color.html

http://www.planete-auto.fr/english/gunze-color-chart.asp

You won't find a match across all brand names. 

These charts are not Official!

A couple of your listed paints do not seem to have an "exact match".

(That old wound I referred to is "what color was the Arizona on 7 Dec 1941".)

     I hope some other folks have worked with the Colors mentioned and have better recommendations.

    Jim.

 P.S.  GM and I were writting at the same time. I am in the "Blue" boat group for the Attack.   If you are are doing a Late 1941 Arizona it is now beleved to have been 5-S sea blue sides with 5-L light grey top, black boot topping, antifouling red bottom and a dark grey on metal deck. MM Gunship Gray is a match for deck gray. The tops of turrets # 1, 2, & 4  were red.   MM was making the 5-S, 5-L and Gunship Grey.  Red Hull color- your choice.

http://www.mikeashey.com/SHIP%20PROJECT%20PDFS/ARTICLE-BATTLESHIP-COLORS-AT-PEARL-HARBOR.pdf

Whether or not Ashey is correct, this gives you an idea of the discussion.

I think the consensus is that BB-39 was in Measure 1 Dark Gray until June 1941. At the time of the attack the fleet was in the process of transforming colors to blues. Where Arizona stood in that process remains the debate.

My own best guess from the study by others is that the ship was a blue, or combination of blues, with light gray above the stacks.

There are two parts to this question.  First, translating those colors into other brands.  Second, what was the color scheme for real on the era you are building.  Which, or both, is your main concern?

steve5

could someone help me colours please , I only really like tamiya or MM paint's . is anyone able to help with the colour chart please .

Oh boy!  Roll out the barrel of worms!