Puttering in the Study

Essex bow: short hull/long hull/hurricane bow construction notes

I am researching how the bows of the Essex class carriers changed from their entry into the fleet in 1943 through their long history, and have come across some recent pictures during their modernization periods that may provide a better understanding of how the updating was done.

Short Hull / Long Hull

As originally configured, the Essex class aircraft carriers had a rounded bow as shown at far left above.  During construction, most of the later units of the class had the bow reshaped into a "clipper bow" which was flared forward and to the side to accommodate the second 40 mm quadruple mount antiaircraft gun as shown in the drawings in my 1997 book Essex Class Carriers in action.  The photo of the Shangri La (CV-38) at left is one of the few that seems to show a bit of a jog in the main deck, and a change in the hull plating where the bow lines were reshaped.

SCB-27A/C

During the initial round of postwar modernization, six of the "short-hull" units were brought up to SCB-27A or -27C standards, and in each case their bows were altered to the "long hull" form. 

After doing some research, I think how that was accomplished is a little clearer.  These two photos shown the Essex (CV-9) beginning her modernization in April 1949.  Oddly, the sides of her flight deck forward have been removed, which doesn't seem to make sense, since the flight deck remained after the conversion. 
 

But I was looking at similar photos of the Lexington's modernization at Puget Sound five years later and the pieces fell into place.  

These two photos, taken in April and June of 1954 show a short-hull Essex being reshaped into a "long-hull" prior to also receiving a hurricane bow, since Lexington went straight from her World War II confirguration into a SCB-125 one.  In other words, she missed the middle stage of the top photo, and went straight to the third photo. 

In the first photo, "No. 1 and No. 2 sections of new bow" are in the foreground.  The structure behind is the third "bent" supporting the flight deck - everything forward of it has been removed, and the entire bow forward of about the first bent has been sliced off and a new section of bow with the clipper lines is being prepared for attaching. 

For purposes of illustration, the attached photo of the Oriskany model shows the three "bents" on a long-hull ship.

Here's the interesting part.  The next photo, taken two months later, shows the new hull section (with a hawsehole, I note) attached and notes "installation of two of the three flight deck sections removed earlier in the conversion.  And now we see bents # 1 and 2 reattached to bent #3 and to the forecastle - essentially the section remaining on Essex in the photos above.  And this is when I noticed that the pictures of the Essex showed a railing being placed separating the forward section of the flight and gallery decks - it was because they were about to be removed.

But this shows how far back into the hull and superstructure they went in the "short-hull" ships to reshape the bow lines in the SCB-27A/C modernizations, and for the two "short-hull" ships that did their -27C and -125 at the same time, Lexington and Bon Homme Richard.

In case you're interested, the hurricane bow itself was delivered on a truck and mounted on the ship by crane.

SCB-125

Did the bows have to be cut back this far in the SCB-125 conversions that added hurricane bows? No.

As the attached photo of Ticonderoga shows, while the technique was similar, the section of bow that had to be cut back was far smaller, and didn't require removal of any of the flight deck supports. This photo of Shangri La shows only half removed, and then during the bow rebuild.

But why was any removed at all?  I had assumed that the clipper bows were just faired up into the new hurricane bows.  

The "clipper bows" caused excessive slamming in service, with the Ticonderoga buckling her main deck during a passage around Cape Horn, causing major damage.  This reinforced the need for hurricane bows, but also resulted in the existing bows being reshaped slightly to offer less resistance to the waves in heavy seas. 

As this comparison of the Oriskany's forecastle after her SCB-125 modernization to a long hull forecastle kit part shows, the corners of the bow were rounded somewhat, which made the final hurricane bows less likely to cause unwanted slamming.

USS Bon Homme Richard (CV-31) Double Build

My next project will be a "double build" of kits as the USS Bon Homme Richard (CV-31), one of the last of the Essex class carriers to make it into combat in the Pacific before the end of World War II in 1945. 

One kit will represent the ship in its initial configuration in the summer of 1945, shown at left refueling with the battleship Missouri.  For this I'm using the state of the art Dragon kit of CV-31 at it appeared a few years later when reactivated for the Korean War in 1951-52.  

The second will represent the Bonnie Dick in 1968 as an attack carrier off the coast of Vietnam after her SCB 27C / SCB 125 modernization. For this version I am using an old Hasegawa kit that I bought at least 26 years ago intending to accurize it as an October 1944 Yorktown (CV-10) as I had done with two other similar kits the previous two years.  It's long since been surpassed by the new Trumpeter and Dragon kits, but it'll do fine as the starting point for an angled deck postwar Essex.  None of the detail is accurate, but all will be covered or replaced anyway.

I chose the BHR because I needed the Dragon kit for parts to finish Oriskany.  BHR has the "early jets" aircraft, and after getting it I discovered it also has the twin 20mm mounts that CV-34 carried (briefly). I was going to just build it as the 1968 version, but that would be a waste of a really good kit.  So I decided to backdate the kit to the carrier's World War II appearance (I always wanted a Measure 12/Measure 22 two-tone Essex anyway) and use the old Hasegawa kit from my stash as the base for the angled deck version.  

The 1968 version will combine the research and skills I've learned on the SCB-125 Essex and the SCB-27A Oriskany - but every ship is different.  BHR was one of the three ships that got both the 27 and 125 modernization in one yard period - and as a 27C ship she has a completely different bow flight deck and hull from the Essex, which I'm looking forward to modeling.  Plus, I've never scratchbuilt a hurricane bow, especially for a ship that went from a "short hull" to SCB-125 in one fell swoop.  (The other was Lexington (CV-16) but I already have a 1/700 CV-16, and I'm trying not to unnecessarily duplicate ships.  This project is the exception).

I try to focus on a specific feature in each build, and on BHR it'll be the forward elevator.  BHR was one of the few ships that had the forward elevator elongated by extending the forward edge - either to accommodate larger aircraft or the tugs that pulled them.  I've built #2 and #3 elevators up and down before - but never #1, and certainly never a pentagonal shape. So that'll be something new to look forward to. 

I'll build both kits' #1 elevators down so the change in configuration is apparent.  The Dragon kit already has a fairly accurate elevator well (as you can see in the picture below), but the Hasegawa doesn't even have a hangar deck, so everything - including the flight deck opening - will be scratchbuilt.

The Dragon kit could be built far faster since other than thickening the gallery deck - which kit makers always model too thin - and redoing the catwalks it's an almost OOB build - but I'm hoping to keep both at about the same level both so I can use the Dragon kit as a guide for the extensive scratchbuilding that'll be needed on the Hasegawa, and show the differences that were made in the later version of the ship.

Also, the Dragon will be painted throughout the process, but I'm hoping to keep the Hasegawa largely unpainted (at least the exterior) to show the work as it's being done. 

Study Ceiling: Winston Churchill

The world history stack was filling up, so it did a friendly takeover of the adjacent shelves (medieval history and reading/libraries) and moved British and French history onto that two – shelf stack.  Of course that got me thinking about who to put in the roundel above.

I had thought about Winston Churchill for the military history stack a couple of years ago, but after reading Nigel Hamilton's FDR at War series it became clear that although he was on the right side of history, his military management skills were abysmal, and he actively attempted to sabotage Roosevelt's D-Day invasion plans, then rewrote the relevant history in his memoirs.  Oh, and he actively resisted giving Britain's colonies the self-government rights we were ostensibly fighting the war for.  So I went with George C Marshall. 

But if you're just talking about the leading figure in the history of Britain and France, it becomes a much easier choice.  While, as I said, Churchill's military skills and instincts were atrocious, in the summer of 1940 he was the sole figure in the British government that was willing to resist Hitler, and had the political skills to bring his country around to his way of thinking.  I just finished Eric Larson's The Splendid and the Vile, and it reminded me again of Churchill's gifts.

So Winnie is up there between the pope and a Byzantine emperor - which he would no doubt find completely appropriate.  The boys are trying to get me to put the French knight from Monty Python and the Holy Grail on the parapet over him as I did with the Beatles, and I'm still mulling it over. 

Daybreak For Our Carrier - Max Miller

I picked up an e-book Carrier! Life Aboard a World War II Aircraft Carrier for 99 cents the other day, despite the generally poor reviews - and ended up very happy that I did.

It turned out the book is actually a republication of the 1944 book Daybreak For Our Carrier by reserve officer Lt. Max Miller, a peacetime writer called into service during the war.  Miller was writing about what life on an aircraft carrier was like for people back home during the war, so the book is almost completely lacking in specifics - no ship or aircraft or island names at all - just his take on what it's like on this new type of warship.

The book began almost exactly the same as the narration for the movie The Fighting Lady, also released in 1944 about life on the same carrier.  It's only slightly sappy in places, but not overly so given the age - in fact it's one of the more restrained pieces of its era that I've read.  But his take is simply terrific.  He's not presenting life as an exercise in patriotism and duty but as simply what goes on on the ship. Three images in the book stood out to me.

First, he described the predawn General Quarters during which all the ship's planes would be warmed up and readied for possible launch on the flight deck.  But here's the picture he paints of what he sees when he looks down from the island through the complete darkness toward the tightly packed planes spotted aft:

"The blue-reddish flames from the multitude of exhausts, all bursting and roaring at the same time in the blackness, is what gives the flight deck its Dante’s Inferno complexion during such times. They do not throw out much light but they do throw out terrible shadows under the wings and against the fuselages; fiery shadows which appear to be leaping and shrieking in a mad effort to get the hell away from there. It is as if, too, the devil’s own little henchmen were having a lot to do with the affair, as if they deliberately were stirring it up, as if they were wanting a real fight to occur between flame and flame, the winner being the one which can out roar the other."

(Emphasis mine).

 

What an incredible mental image - one that had never occurred to me since I've never seen engine exhaust at night, and never thought about the shadows it'd throw under the packed aircraft.  You can catch a glimpse of it in these two paintings by his fellow reserve office William Draper who was aboard the same ship a few months later, and painted views from the island at night. 

 

Miller also paints metaphorical pictures of the ship during an operation, noting that due to its sending its planes out, it becomes hard to know how the day went.

For a carrier’s pattern of operations, as previously mentioned, continues to be a sort of fourth-dimensional one even during an engagement.... Each of these tangents is a thread then, and if under the pressure of the weaving, these threads get lost or snap, the day’s design automatically may change.... that is the trouble with engagements in general. They do not follow the rules of good theater any more than a day’s pattern will always stick to its original design.

Another great example of writing that conveys what carrier life must have been like.  Unlike the ships around it, the carrier's life is tied up in what happens to its aircraft.

 

He also refers several times to the dark catwalk under the flight deck that led from the squadron ready rooms to the flight deck.  This would have been suspended above the hangar deck, and would have been the place all the pilots traversed on their way to their planes - a sort of tunnel suspended in space.  Pointing it out just really brought home to me the journey that these men were about to make.

 

Finally, he narrates his trip as an observer in a plane on a bombing mission, and provides yet another unique description of the carrier.  Every account I've ever read refers to the carrier in maternal terms - as a mother hen to her fliers.  His experience after leaving her deck was different - he writes that "[i]n shoving us out of the nest she merely had turned from a mother ship into a rather stern old dad." And a dad that expected results, he continues.  That's a completely unique observation about a carrier.

 

In summary, a great little book.  I hunted a good copy down online after I read the e-book. I want my own copy of this one.

Bringing Back a Hero - Robert D. Jornlin

Our last stop on our RV trip was LST 325 in Evansville, Indiana, where I picked up this book by its captain on its return voyage in 2000-2001.  The story is an incredible one.  A crew of retired LST sailors, average age 72, got the ship back in working condition and talked their way into bringing back over 6,000 miles across the Mediterranean and Atlantic to the United States - so we'd have an example of a World War II LST.

The ship was an incredible experience to visit, but the artifact pales compared to what these men did to bring her home.  Jornlin was a retired commander from the 1960's, but his experience on the vessels and in feed sales gave him both the technical and the personal skills to successfully negotiate the challenges of getting the ship restored and the necessary permissions to bring her home.

I highly, highly recommend this book. 

The US Navy and the War in Europe - Robert C. Stern

This is another relatively recent (2012) Naval Institute Press book by prolific naval author Robert Stern.  It explores the little-explored aspect of the Navy’s contribution to victory in World War II which was the Atlantic theater, and in so doing clarifies why it is little-explored.

The Navy’s role in the Atlantic war was a limited one initially, although not as limited as it should have been under principles of international law applying to neutral nations.  The book explains why FDR drew the lines differently prior to U.S. entry in the war, and the practical effect that this had.  It also explains the cooperation between the Royal Navy and the U.S. Navy in beginning protecting shipping from U-boat attack.

One thing this book shows that none other I have read does is the extremely secondary nature of the theater in U.S. naval planning.  The Atlantic only got the assets that the Navy could spare from the Pacific, and those assets started being raided after December 7, making this the first book I’ve read that make the Pacific Fleet in WW II look well-taken care of by comparison.  The carrier Yorktown left immediately after the attack, and the three relatively modern New Mexico class battleships (they were WW I vintage but had been modernized during the interwar period) followed soon after, effectively making good the battleship losses sustained in the attack - a little-known fact.  The Navy had eight battleships at Pearl Harbor when the attack occurred (with one refitting on the West Coast).  Several weeks later it still had eight battleships in fighting trim in the Pacific, but they were stuck on the West Coast for lack of tankers and air cover.  

After the U.S. began losing carriers at Coral Sea and Midway the Wasp - which had been making runs into the Mediterranean to deliver Spitfires and otherwise making herself useful - was also pulled out.  The only carrier to remain - Ranger - was left because, as Stern points out - she wasn’t wanted in the Pacific. FDR himself apologized for her condition to Churchill on 16 April 1942 saying that she was best suited for use as a “ferry boat” for aircraft because “we are not proud” of her compartmentation and structural strength. Stern later identifies another problem - due to her hull shape she could only operate aircraft in a mild swell, which would have made her unsuited for operations in the Pacific.  Nor was that all - due to her slow top speed she could not launch fully loaded aircraft without help from the wind.  At one point in late 1943 an entire task force sat drumming its hands for 20 minutes off the Norwegian coast waiting for her to find a couple of knots of wind so she could launch her CAP and then strike aircraft.  All this reminds me that someone needs to write on how the Navy learned enough from 1934 to 1940 that it could build an effective carrier (Wasp) using the same tonnage as the ineffective Ranger.  Wasp was slightly slower and less well-protected that her Yorktown-class half-sisters, but she could and did operate with them effectively in August and September of 1942 off Guadalcanal. Ranger could not have, apparently.

The story of the Atlantic war that Stern tells is largely one of small engagements between destroyers, submarines and merchant shipping, where small U.S. ships sustained frequent losses due to German attacks.  The surface engagements are there, but they are rare, usually small, and often between unevenly matched combatants.

Oddly, Stern does not cover at all a couple of significant U.S. Navy operations in the Atlantic.  There is no mention of the new battleship Iowa carrying FDR to the conferences in Cairo and Teheran in late 1943. It was specifically forbidden by Admiral King from going out and looking for trouble while waiting on FDR’s return, but still - it was a major fleet unit and should have been noted.

And most significantly, while he covers the damage suffered by Navy vessels, especially destroyers, in great detail throughout the book, including at D-Day, he leaves out completely the major role played by the destroyers during the June 6 landings in battling shore emplacements at extreme risk to themselves.  Stephen Ambrose addresses these incidents extensively in his D-Day book, but they are completely absent here, despite the high drama they represent.  In many ways they were the high point of the Navy’s contribution to the shooting war in the theater, and their omission in a book largely missing high drama is an odd one.

Another omission is showing the increasing strength of the Atlantic fleet as the war went on.  Stern makes clear at the beginning just how phenomenally weak the Navy’s forces in the Atlantic were, which is helpful, but doesn’t note quantitatively how that changed as the war went on.  It would be something like telling the war in the Pacific beginning by noting the Navy’s limited supply of carriers in 1942, and then never noting that they were replaced four or five-fold with new construction.  Having those additional assets changed the picture of what the U.S. could do, and there’s nothing comparable in this book with respect to the Atlantic theater.  He does make mention of new construction, but not in a way that shows how the Navy’s ability to fight the war in the Atlantic changed between 1941 and 1945, and when the shortages in warships were remedied.  Or whether they were remedied effectively or resulted in unnecessary units in some areas which excess construction occurred in others.

Overall an interesting book, but a highly specialized one, which tells a fairly small slice of the story.  Other books provide a more comprehensive analysis of the Battle of the Atlantic (I don’t have a recommendation on this one), the Mediterranean campaigns (the first two Atkinson books) and the naval side of D-Day (Symonds’ Neptune). But if you want the ship by ship engagements that the Navy’s destroyers fought, with damage accounts, this is your source.  The sources at the end are also going to be very valuable to you if you’re interested in this subject, since Stern identifies all the good books, references and cites for this area.

Allied Master Strategists The Combined Chiefs of Staff in World War II - David Rigby

This is a 2012 Naval Institute Press book that analyzes the role played by the Combined Chiefs of Staff during World War II.  It’s a good source of information, although I was a bit annoyed with the way the author periodically broke the fourth wall to discuss the writing of the book.  Yes, I get it - it’s a book you wrote.  I’ll call you (in the notes) if I need any help, thanks.

But the topic is a good and underserved one, since the Chiefs’ role in the war bears more attention that it has gotten.  The book covers the individual members of the two staffs, and well as their staff, all of which played an enormous role in the successful partnership between the British and American war machines during the conflict.

There were even some stories I had never seen before, including the American chiefs’ ham-handed party-crashing of the Azores bases that the British chiefs had painstakingly negotiated with neutral Portugal.  Or the back and forth neutral missions by the Swedish liner Gripsholm (shown in her wartime livery below - with the exception that the 5’ tall letters DIPLOMAT have been painted over) which  ferried exchanged prisoners and Red Cross supplies so often that the U.S. deliberately delayed releasing stories of Japanese mistreatment of U.S. prisoners so that it could continue sending supplies to American POWs.

The book is broken into chapters by topic, which makes it a little hard to follow what is happening during the war chronologically, and some of the opinions (Admiral King’s strategic genius) are a bit under supported, but it is still a useful addition to the bookshelf for untangling how exactly a particular dispute was handled if it involved a Chief.

Allied Master Strategists The Combined Chiefs of Staff in World War II - David Rigby

This is a 2012 Naval Institute Press book that analyzes the role played by the Combined Chiefs of Staff during World War II.  It’s a good source of information, although I was a bit annoyed with the way the author periodically broke the fourth wall to discuss the writing of the book.  Yes, I get it - it’s a book you wrote.  I’ll call you (in the notes) if I need any help, thanks.

But the topic is a good and underserved one, since the Chiefs’ role in the war bears more attention that it has gotten.  The book covers the individual members of the two staffs, and well as their staff, all of which played an enormous role in the successful partnership between the British and American war machines during the conflict.

There were even some stories I had never seen before, including the American chiefs’ ham-handed party-crashing of the Azores bases that the British chiefs had painstakingly negotiated with neutral Portugal.  Or the back and forth neutral missions by the Swedish liner Gripsholm (shown in her wartime livery below - with the exception that the 5’ tall letters DIPLOMAT have been painted over) which  ferried exchanged prisoners and Red Cross supplies so often that the U.S. deliberately delayed releasing stories of Japanese mistreatment of U.S. prisoners so that it could continue sending supplies to American POWs.

The book is broken into chapters by topic, which makes it a little hard to follow what is happening during the war chronologically, and some of the opinions (Admiral King’s strategic genius) are a bit under supported, but it is still a useful addition to the bookshelf for untangling how exactly a particular dispute was handled if it involved a Chief.

The Good Shepherd - C.S. Forester

When I realized the new Tom Hanks movie Greyhound is based on this book by the author of the Hornblower books I had to go back and reread it.  Terrific read - started it last night and finished it today.  I know I’ve read it before - notes say I got it in San Diego which means a long, long time ago, but I’m pretty sure I read it at the time.

Can’t wait to see the movie!

Moon Men Return: USS Hornet and the Recovery of the Apollo 11 Astronauts - Scott Carmichael

As part of my research into exactly how an Essex-class carrier operated when recovering an Apollo command module, I picked up this book direct from the U.S. Naval Institute about the experience of the USS Hornet (CV–12) which recovered the Apollo 11 astronauts in July 1969.

There good things and bad things about this book. Under the category of "inexplicable bad things" why in the world would you put a picture on the cover of the Hornet in the 1950s in a completely different configuration than when it recovered Apollo 11?  It is completely unrecognizable as the same ship.

Similarly, the book begins with a number of false notes, beginning with the overwrought praise of the Hornet's wartime record as making it a peculiarly appropriate choice as the recovery ship. Yes, the Hornet had an exemplary wartime record, but it was not uniquely appropriate that it was selected to recover Apollo 11. Once you get over that schmaltz, which is probably unavoidable given that the author spent years interviewing former crewmembers and clearly adopted their completely understandable pride in their ship, there are repeated instances, especially early in the book where some editing would've been in order, because the author frequently says things about persons two or three times, with each sentence having its complement of adjectives. It isn't as bad as reading '40's fiction, but it's close.

There are also some odd statements, such as the reference to an officer having assigned a young Lieut. John F. Kennedy to command of U.S. PT boats in the Pacific. It is technically correct that he assigned Kennedy to command a couple of boats – but the sentence could easily be read as that he assigned Kennedy to command of all U.S. PT boats in the Pacific, which would not be correct. Neil Armstrong is similarly called out for his positive qualities in "spaceflights " prior to his assignment to Apollo 11  But Armstrong only had one spaceflight before Apollo 11.

Either the writing got better or I stopped noticing, because before long the book had me very interested in the subject matter. It explained how the Hornet was run, and how it absorbed the new task of recovering the astronauts. It went into detail about the equipment used and how the crew was trained in the recovery, including a great deal of detail about the Navy and NASA personnel that went from ship to ship ensuring that the recovery would be done correctly. The sections dealing with how the ship managed to visit of President Nixon, who arrived on the Hornet to watch the recovery, but spent only three hours on the ship, were very interesting as well.

The point at which I realized that this book was not going to be a direct read on the Essex's recovery of Apollo 7 the previous October was when it began discussing the extreme fear at the time that the astronauts would bring back "moon germs" which would infect Earth and kill us all. Accordingly, detailed procedures were developed and followed during the recovery to limit as much as possible the extent to which the returning astronauts could contaminate the Hornet during the recovery process.

One thing this book did not do, which I appreciated, was focus on the popular obsession with Apollo 11 that was present in society at large at the time of the mission. It certainly mentions it in numerous places, but it avoids going into it in so much detail that a regular Apollo reader would get bored.

All in all, although I wish the book had been edited a little better, it was a very interesting story and literally kept me up at night.