USS Enterprise (CV-6) by ted99 - Trumpeter - 1:200 - PLASTIC

[CDW]

On 6/25/2023 at 11:14 AM, ted99 said:

When I finally get around to the Missouri and it's Pontos detail kit, I'll find out if there is any difference compared to MK-1.

Pontos only provides photos of the model with the photo etch attached. Sounds a lot like Mk-1 in that sense. Indeed, you are correct, reference materials are needed.

[ted99]

While waiting for the wind to die down, I did a run of Jax Flemish gray on my MK 1 PE brass.  I like it.  It's a bluish gray and will blend well with the "Navy Blue--Rust-oleum 2X" hull color.  The Buships instructions for Measure 21 say to paint over the standard Navy gray on the vertical surfaces but not to worry about coating all the surfaces of smaller structures.  I read that as "Don't sweat the small stuff", so this Flemish gray should be a good match to the hull paint for the PE details I will be adding.  There will be a little PE excess at the attachment points (less and less as I get better), but a final coat of Matte clear over all surfaces, as I did for Bismarck, should render that invisible( fingers crossed).  All this in aid of reducing paint-masking of PE details.

 

Roger--I'll have a look for the Humbrol blue stain, but it will have a hard time competing with an $8, 1/2 pt can of Min-wax.  It's oil-based, so I don't expect any curling of the thin wood veneer deck from MK 1.  I'll do a test on a left-over piece of Yamato decking, first.  I'll have to stain the deck pieces before attachment to the flight deck, though.  There will be inevitable excess PVA glue at the edges of the many, many deck pieces, which would not absorb the semi-transparent stain.  I have to use stain as I want to preserve as much of the printed-on details as possible.  The MK 1 detail set also has PE stainless steel for the  separators/tie downs on the flight deck.  Way too silver and bright.  I gave the Jax chemicals a try at changing the color of the SS to blue or black.  Went thru Flemish gray, gun blue, steel black, pewter black and aluminum black with no results.  Unless someone knows of a blackening agent that will work on SS, I'm going to have to do a very light spray of the SS PE sheets with paint, before assembly.

 

As to the process I used for the Flemish gray:  First step was to do a wash of the PE sheets with dishwashing soap and rinse.  Then an overnight soak in White Vinegar.  I used a pyrex rectangular dish with a flat bottom and separated each PE sheet with a couple of pieces of left-over sprue.  That allowed me to do all of the PE set in one go.  After another rinse, I repeated this with the Jax Flemish gray.  The graying happens quite quickly, but I left the pieces in the solution for about an hour just to see what else happened--nothing.  I had bought a gallon of the Jax Flemish gray, after seeing how fast the 2 oz bottle I bought on e-bay got used up when I gave this a try on Yamato.  In the pictures of the PE sheets you can see a few "holidays" where the chemical process had not taken.  By process of elimination, I determined this was due to sheets of PE brass sticking together in the chemical bath.  A subsequent rub with a Q-tip resolved most of those problems.  However, there were a few edges of PE pieces that turned copper-colored.  I am guessing that this was due to imperfections in the brass sheet that I will have to deal with if it's visible after assembly with a dab of paint.  The next time I do this (on Missouri), I'll dip each sheet individually for about a minute each and see how that works out.  The coating seems a lot like anodizing.  You can't rub it off, but can scratch through it.  Looking forward to seeing how this ends up on the completed model.

 

Picture shows the 2-cans of primer I used and a gallon jug of the Jax Flemish Gray.  This go of coloring used about a quart of the chemical, which I saved to see if it's still reactive if I need to do some more parts.

 

Again, research on Measure 21 says that the Hanger deck floors were standard Navy gray, but the walls were White.  I came on this after I had masked the hanger deck and decided to just paint the whole interior of the Hanger deck Navy gray.  This is forewarning for future builders.  If I were to do it again, I'd follow this process:  Before gluing in the ceiling girders over the Hanger deck, paint the walls white.  Then, mask the walls off and paint the floor Navy gray--this is a lot easier without the girders..  If you are going to paint the girders (Navy gray), do it before assembly.  I didn't paint them because they will be impossible to see through the side roller doors once the Flight deck is attached.  Finally, assemble the girders with CA glue as all the plastic is covered with paint and plastic solvent won't work.

 

A further note for future builders:  As I mentioned earlier, I omitted the roller doors to allow sight lines through them to the interior of the Hanger deck, where I will have a few of the aircraft included in the Trumpeter kit.  I did place the roller doors in any place where there was nothing to see through them, but I forgot the ones directly beneath the Island.  There is a solid structure on the part of the Hanger deck directly beneath the island and there are three roller doors in the Hanger deck starboard bulkhead where I neglected to install the roller doors.  Too late now--they are just black holes now, unless light is shining directly on them.

[ted99]

Had a break in the wind this morning and was able to do the hull painting.  Two close-ups of the panel detail.  The horizontal lines were from the alternate 10mm-wide masking tape with 4 coats of Rust-oleum automotive primer on unmasked 10mm-wide strips.  I'm very pleased with the panel definition.  Vertical lines done with a fresh #11 exacto knife and the horizontal lines an artifact of the alternate lines of no-primer and 4 coats of primer.  Just enough definition.  Note that I did not do any simulated panels in the underwater anti-fouling paint part of the hull.  Seemed like overkill and I'm happy with it missing.  So, this has proved to be a very satisfactory way to simulate panel lines.  No research into where the actual panels were--just what looked like "good enough", without being obsessive about the prototype.

[Roger Pellett]

Hull plating looks very good!

[ddp]

Ted, how come you did not glue in the catapult machinery enclosure or was it to paint that area 1st before doing the enclosure? no 4" armor belt visible on that model as should be about .5mm thick at 1/200 scale?

[ted99]

It's there, photo angle just doesn't show it.  Trumpeter didn't include the armor belt in their casting, so I let it slide.  At the outset, I decided I would build the kit "as is", except for detail pieces.  The simulated hull plating was an easy exception as it helps a lot, for little effort.  

[ddp]

what is there, the catapult machinery enclosure or the 4" armor belt?

[ted99]

If the catapult machinery enclosure you are referring to is the large structure on the hanger deck immediately beneath the island, it's there.  Earlier pictures of the flight deck show it.  One of the first things attached, as it's the anchor for the starboard sides of the hanger deck. Since I did not spring for any reference books on CV-6 (turned out to be overkill for Yamato), if it ain't labeled on the Trumpeter "instructions", I don't have it.  I wondered what that enclosure was for and made a logic leap that it's the catapult machinery enclosure you are describing. 

 

However, it's news to me that there were catapults on WW II-era carriers.

[ted99]

When looking up the history of CV-6, I saw a reference to "blister armor" being added at a yard-availability during the Pacific campaigns, but could find no pictures of it.  The reference to "blister" was problematic, too, as I had never seen anything remotely looking like the other pictures I found regarding blister armor.  From ddp's question, I surmise that what was added was a 4" thick belt of armor attached to the exterior of the hull, not a blister.  But, lacking any reference materials, I don't know where this belt was located.  If it didn't extend into the areas of the bow and stern curvature, or too far down, it could have been relatively easy to add with a plastic strip.  I presume it was for torpedo protection, but don't know how much it extended above and below the waterline.  Wouldn't have been very useful with proximity-fused torpedo's detonating beneath the hull, anyway.  If Buships had been more concerned with making our MK-19 torpedo detonators work, in the early days, it would have been much more useful than this "gilding the lilly" stuff. 

 

This armor belt is useful note for future builders wanting to model a particular period for CV-6.

[ddp]

remember  that the 1st 2 carriers of this class was built in the mid to late 1930's & they had catapults then as aircraft were getting heavier.

USA - CV-5 USS Yorktown Booklet of General Plans (1940) https://archive.org/details/cv5bogp1940

 

look for the armor belt at the waterline area on the Midship and Type Sections drawings plus the outboard profile drawing.

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by ddp

[Canute]

The USN had hangar deck catapults on the Yorktowns and early Essexes. I saw a picture of a Hellcat going off that way.  Took up a lot of space and limited the ship to only the starboard catapult on the flight deck. It was a short shot and usually with some kind of crosswind. They were removed in late '42 into' 43.

[Roger Pellett]

The catapults were not the steam catapults used on the Forrestall and Nimitz class ships.  These were developed by the British and began to be used in the 1950’s.  The catapults used on the Essex Class carriers were hydraulic-pneumatic and according to Wikipedia, Lexington used flywheel powered catapults.  So, Enterprise would fit in between.

 

There is a copy of a US Navy technical manual on the internet  describing the Essex Class hydraulic-pneumatic catapults.  The system used pumps to pressure a non-flammable liquid that in turn compressed air stored in large flasks.  Upon release, the rapidly expanding air provided the impulse to launch the plane.

 

Roger

Edited July 4, 2023 by Roger Pellett

[ddp]

Ted, the catapult machinery enclosure i'm talking about is at the front end of the ship below the flight deck.  your picture that shows the front end of the ship shows 2 platforms on rectangular posts, those platforms are actually the bottom of the catapult machinery enclosures i'm talking about.

[ted99]

^^^ I'm attaching a pertinent page of the Trumpeter assembly manual that shows a compartment just aft of the anchor capstans that "could" be the catapult machinery compartment.  In the Trumpeter kit, those four pillars at the bow are supports for the latticework flight deck supports.  I'll be showing a picture of them soon.

 

Well, live and learn.  I was aware of the Brit development of steam catapults post WW II, but not that any of any type were on the WW II carriers.  In any event, the Trumpeter kit flight deck does not have any provision of the "rails" that would have been embedded in a catapult mechanism.  So, I'm presuming that the model is for the period after the catapults were removed.  The Wikipedia "history" of CV-6, that did mention the addition of belt blisters during a yard availability did not have any mention of catapults.

 

Thank you very much for those Yard drawings of the armor belt.  Looks like it would have been an easy add at an early stage.  No compound curves--just build up styrene sheet strips until .5mm thickness was reached.  Had I known, I would have done this.  Ah well, lots to learn in this hobby and the importance of research.  I wish someone had done a build log of CV-6 before, that I could have learned from.

SCAN_20230705_101758434.pdf

[ddp]

your scan does not show that enclosure. 

the hanger catapult was removed not the flight deck's as still there at the end of the war. https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020627.jpg

https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/06a.htm

i would have used a single layer of .020"(.5mm) styrene to do that belt.

[gak1965]

Yorktown and Enterprise had cross deck catapults on the hanger deck. Basically sent an aircraft out the hanger doors. The photos in Warships after Washington seem to imply that they are flying through the hanger on the way out. Some photos here: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/11821/the-crazy-aircraft-carrier-hangar-catapults-of-world-war-ii.

 

They were apparently removed during the war, and not added past the first batches of Essexes

Edited July 5, 2023 by gak1965

[CDW]

27 minutes ago, gak1965 said:

Yorktown and Enterprise had cross deck catapults on the hanger deck. Basically sent an aircraft out the hanger doors. The photos in Warships after Washington seem to imply that they are flying through the hanger on the way out. Some photos here: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/11821/the-crazy-aircraft-carrier-hangar-catapults-of-world-war-ii.

 

They were apparently removed during the war, and not added past the first batches of Essexes

Great information here. Thanks for the link.

[ted99]

Well, isn't that interesting!!!  No hanger deck doors wide enough for a plane in the Trumpeter kit and no place at the bow for a machinery space--just that compartment immediately aft of the bulkhead behind the anchor capstans. With a Hanger deck catapult, is that large structure on the hanger deck under the Island the place where the launch equipment could have been located.

[ddp]

what fighter planes are in that kit, Wildcats or Hellcats?

the compartment is in front of that bulkhead mounted on 2 rectangular posts with a hole in each. you are facing the same problem that a member on another site faced til i showed him the way. look at the drawings i have provided as it shows where the launch equipment is located(not under the island).

your picture that shows the bow of the model shows the bottom of the flight deck catapult machinery enclosure but is missing the sides which the other member had to make for his model so appears you will have to do the same.

[Roger Pellett]

According to Wikipedia, the best information that I can find at the moment, Enterprise was equipped with one hanger level cross deck catapult (removed later) and two hydraulic flight deck catapults.  If this is correct, the two flight deck catapults would be visible on the model.

 

Roger

[ddp]

the plans i have of the 1st 2 ships of the Yorktown class that i got off the net shows all 3 catapults.

[ddp]

Ted, this is the areas i am talking about.

[gak1965]

On 7/4/2023 at 10:53 AM, ddp said:

remember  that the 1st 2 carriers of this class was built in the mid to late 1930's & they had catapults then as aircraft were getting heavier.

USA - CV-5 USS Yorktown Booklet of General Plans (1940) https://archive.org/details/cv5bogp1940

And looking at the diagrams in the link, the cross deck catapult is just aft of the forward elevator. What year is the Trumpeter kit meant to represent? The ship went into the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in the summer of '43. Maybe it's late war.

[ted99]

Got it. The drawings are extremely helpful. The MK-1 detail set HAS the enclosure.  It's part of the bow flight deck lattice support.  I'm assembling that now and will show pictures later.

 

The Trumpeter kit does not have any machinery space for a catapult on the hanger deck, a wide side door, rails, or a machinery space at the bow.  Nor, is there any provision for the rails in the flight deck.  BUT, the MK 1 detail set for the wooden deck DOES have the bow rails.  So, with both the catapult machinery space and the bow rails (which the Trumpeter kit is missing), the MK 1 detail set is very accurate to the original.

 

The kit includes four each of the F4F-4, TBD-1, and SBD-3.  I purchased a set of 4 of the Trumpeter B-25's from the Dolittle raid.  I'm going to put one on the flight deck just for fun.  I'll put the F4F's and one of the SBD's on the flight deck simulating readiness for CAP and the others on the Hanger deck.  My version of the MK 1 detail set does not have the extra details for the aircraft that added wing-folding capability.

[Roger Pellett]

The B25’s for the Dolittle Raid were carried aboard Hornet.  Enterprise escorted.  She would carried her normal outfit of aircraft.

 

Roger

[Canute]

The Dauntlesses had fixed wings, no fold mechanism.

[ted99]

Yes, read about Enterprise's escort duties.  As I said, "JUST FOR FUN".  

[ted99]

As promised, pictures of the Flight deck lattice supports at bow and stern.  Pictures juxtaposed with the Trumpeter kit parts.  You can see the horseshoe-shaped compartment inside the bow lattice which contained the catapult machinery.  I take back what I said about Trumpeter not including the bow catapult rails in the kit.  I just removed the two pieces of the Flight deck from their plastic protectors and padding was wrapped around the bow, hiding the launch rails molded-in detail.  Box art did not show this.

 

As you might be able to see from the pictures, the Flemish gray coating turns a dark brown/gray with age, plus it peels off if tension is placed on a CA joint between two brass pieces, exposing the brass beneath.  Consequence: a weak joint for larger pieces.  As a result, I do not think that use of the Jax Flemish gray is a good idea for coloring the PE brass, in lieu of gray paint.

 

A question for those with far better research materials:  I've shown a picture of the bottom of the aft end of the Flight deck illustrating the two cutouts Trumpeter calls for at each side of the curved part of the Flight deck.  One cannot see these cutouts on the top of the Flight deck leading me to the idea that at some time, those cutouts were not there.  Can anyone provide any info on this?

[ted99]

Apologies.   I hadn't loaded the pictures from my iphone to the computer, before.  Done now.

[ddp]

Ted, the catapult machinery enclosure hangs down below the flight deck framework to that U shaped platform on those 2 rectangular posts. you have to extend the sides of Trumpeter's enclosure to that platform by using sheet plastic. look at the 1st drawing that i orange  circled the enclosure.

the cutouts were put there in mid 1943 for 2 platforms containing 2x20mm aa guns each. 

https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/020695.jpg

https://www.navsource.org/archives/02/06a.htm

this is what i am talking about after going thru your pictures.

Edited July 8, 2023 by ddp