Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Iowa Class - history

  1. #1
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,708

    Iowa Class - history

    While researching material for another thread this interesting tidbit of history addresing the Iowa class Naval Warfare study presented itself and the related history of the previous discussed Brass model.

  2. #2
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042
    That brass model was stored for years after the Korean War ended. Then it was brought back out and modified to simulate the new outline of the ship, new antennas, etc.

    The model shown is of the New Jersey. It was first modified in 1968 where you can see the bow 20 mm gun tubs replaced with a smaller bulwark. The ECM houses (ears for the ULQ-6) up on 010 level are there as in 1968 as opposed to the "wrap around) deck house built for the other 3 ships in the 80's.

    The model has been upgraded to the 1980's configuration. This is noted by the absence of the ULQ-6 antenna outriggers, the new tripod mast, the absense of the airplane crane on the stern and the absense of all but the fantail 40 mm shields.
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

  3. #3
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,708

    Details......

    Mr. L,

    This information is a recital of those who prepared the information between the model being acquired by the Truman Library in Independence, MO, the return the 1st (?) time to the Navy (?) and the being sent back to the Truman Library... and then it isn't even the Mighty MO..... it is our cousin to the North!!!

    But I would perfer you decide if in fact it is the IOWA.....

  4. #4
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042
    Sorry, it may have started off as the Iowa, but is actually the New Jersey.

    Well, let's put it this way. Though it is true that only the Iowa had 20 mm guns on top of turret II, that only means this particular model started off that way. For some reason the sparktricians using the model for antenna testing never bothered to take the gun mounts off.

    The Iowa and Wisconsin still have their wide bulwarks on the bow for 20 mm gun mounts. New Jersey and Missouri had them cut off for a smaller bullwark as you can see in the first photo.

    The Discone/Discage antenna was first installed on New Jersey in 1968. The other three ships did not have it installed until the 1980's reactivation.

    Also, only the New Jersey has cubical deckhouse "ears" on each side of the citadel that were built for her 1968 reactivation. They supported the AN/ULQ-6 outriggers. In the 1980's the outriggers were simply cut off and the AN/SLQ-32 ECM antennas mounted on top of the "ears". The other three ships had a new deckhouse built that wrapped around the front.

    So the model started out as the Iowa, but ended up being the New Jersey. Having been the structural Configuration Manager of all four of them in the 1980's I certainly know the differences. I've done inspections and design work on all four of them, been under three of them in dry dock and been to sea on two of them during gunnery trials. The last time I was on Iowa was when we towed her from the mothball fleet in Benicia to Richmond. The next time I will be riding her will be this coming June 9th with my family as she is brought into her new home at Berth 87 in San Pedro.
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

  5. #5
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,708

    Different Arrays....

    The two attached illustrations reflect the changes to the antenna arrays at the Naval Electronis Lab.

    The Photo dates the late 50's and the more recent 1990's.

  6. #6
    In Memoriam/Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,434
    It seems oddd that they left those 20mm guns on the model, I wonder why. They would appear to be significant reflectors (particularly the shields) in terms of radar returns.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

  7. #7
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042
    Quote Originally Posted by USSWisconsin View Post
    It seems oddd that they left those 20mm guns on the model, I wonder why. They would appear to be significant reflectors (particularly the shields) in terms of radar returns.
    That's because the model was not built to see what it looks like from somebody else's RADAR. It was built to study radio and radar antennas ON THE SHIP. The 20 mm gun shields would be way out of the arc of any tranmitting signal from the ship. So the electronics techs just didn't bother to take the time to remove it from the model.
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

  8. #8
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,708

    Reflections..... radar reflections!

    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    That's because the model was not built to see what it looks like from somebody else's RADAR. It was built to study radio and radar antennas ON THE SHIP. The 20 mm gun shields would be way out of the arc of any tranmitting signal from the ship. So the electronics techs just didn't bother to take the time to remove it from the model.
    Noted is the antenna on the bow and the missing gun tubs on the bow.

  9. #9
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042
    We are coming along quite well with the ship while she is still up in Richmond. I'm just hoping the mast replacements are done in accordance with the detailed plans I made for it. They follow Navy Gen Specs to the letter. I have a 3 1/2" thick copy of the Gen Specs just above my head. So I know it's the RIGHT way as well as the NAVY way to put a mast back together. I've built or modified enough of them when I was a ship fitter for 10 years at LBNSY and designed enough of them for 12 years in the design section specializing in mast designs.

    I wish I was up there right now to do the final inspection and sign off as the PBC lead Naval Architect. But things are happening so fast even I didn't know that the first two sub-assemblies have been installed. But it looks like they are going by my designs and that makes me rest easier at night.

    Though I will still take my anti-anxiety pill before going to bed.
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

  10. #10
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,708

    Drug-free ship fitters...

    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    We are coming along quite well with the ship while she is still up in Richmond. I'm just hoping the mast replacements are done in accordance with the detailed plans I made for it. They follow Navy Gen Specs to the letter. I have a 3 1/2" thick copy of the Gen Specs just above my head. So I know it's the RIGHT way as well as the NAVY way to put a mast back together. I've built or modified enough of them when I was a ship fitter for 10 years at LBNSY and designed enough of them for 12 years in the design section specializing in mast designs.

    I wish I was up there right now to do the final inspection and sign off as the PBC lead Naval Architect. But things are happening so fast even I didn't know that the first two sub-assemblies have been installed. But it looks like they are going by my designs and that makes me rest easier at night.

    Though I will still take my anti-anxiety pill before going to bed.
    Mr. L to the thread followers on this board, we really do not appreciate what you know that protects us up in the bleachers from worry.

  11. #11
    Senior Contributor blidgepump's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Jul 09
    Posts
    2,708

    More Iowa Class history.....

    Some more discovered stuff about the Iowa class BB's....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Modernized Iowa Class versus Essex WWII Carrier Class
    By talshiar in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 30 Apr 18,, 11:24
  2. Iowa Class & Midway Class - Same Powerplant?
    By eocoolj in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 01 Jun 11,, 17:40
  3. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 24 Sep 09,, 22:20
  4. Iowa Class BB
    By Stan in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 30 Jul 08,, 19:39
  5. Iowa Class vs Kirov Class
    By eocoolj in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 224
    Last Post: 12 Jun 08,, 00:02

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •