A cruiser question

Azure · Post by **Azure** » Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:54 am

Can someone tell me what class of ship the Quincy was? An elderly gentleman that lives next door to me was a electrician on it in WWII, and he has expressed a desire to have a model of it (he knows i build models...due to my inexperience with these tiny minis, i may build him a plastic one) One in 1/700th or thereabouts would be a good "tabletop" size i think....thanks, Azure

1ComOpsCtr · Post by **1ComOpsCtr** » Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:39 am

The Josiah Quincy was a Liberty Ship built by the New England Shipbuilding Corporation.

Its keel was laid in July of 1943 and it was completed in August of 1943.

It is still in the reserve Fleet. I think it is still in the water at Benicia, (Suisun Bay) Calif.

Don't know if that is the Quincy you are looking for, but that's the Quincy I know a little about. I think I have a picture of it somewhere...

Will
ComOpsCtr

Gort · Post by **Gort** » Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:43 am

Which one did he serve on?

CA-39

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/04039.htm

or

CA-71

http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/04071.htm

tstockton · Post by **tstockton** » Fri Jun 30, 2006 3:52 pm

Azure,

I may build him a plastic one. One in 1/700th or thereabouts would be a good "tabletop" size i think...

One of the best ship modeling sites I've found is SteelNavy.com -- they have all kinds of kit reviews, links, etc., and an entire section devoted to the 1:1200 / 1:1250 scale versions, mostly metal castings.

http://www.steelnavy.com/

http://www.steelnavy.com/1250home.htm

In the 1:1250 scale "world" (which I am much more familiar with)... be sure to check out the castings by the German maker Navis / Neptun. Navis is their WW I line, while Neptun is their WW II line. In the Neptun models, they have both QUINCY's -- the earlier NEW ORLEANS class heavy cruiser (CA-39), sunk of ** CENSORED ** on 9 August 1942, and the later BALTIMORE class heavy cruiser (CA-71), which was sold for breaking up in the early 1970's.

QUINCY (CA-39) -- Neptun model 1333a

QUINCY (CA-71) -- as represented by the BALTIMORE -- Neptun model 1331

As an aside -- I hope GHQ doesn't mind me posting these pictures here... Along with others, I've asked GHQ to manufacture ship models in this scale. From others, I've heard that they are not really interested in doing so. While I know their castings would be excellent, my guess is that the good folks at GHQ "have enough on their plate" already, without going into another genre. 'Tis a pity... they would immediately join Navis / Neptun "at the top of the hill" as far as quality goes!!

Regards,
Tom Stockton

1ComOpsCtr · Post by **1ComOpsCtr** » Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:18 pm

Tom,

When I was going to school in Evanston Ill we used to play Naval wargames on the floor of a local Gym(Howard Street as I remember)using 1200/1250 models. Firing was done using range estimates in inches or millimeters. I still remember having a 1200 scale aircraft carrier destroyed by a player whose name, as I remember, was Larry Lee. He walked 9 shots from his Yamoto right down the flight deck similar to what happened to one of the Taffy group aircraft carriers during one of the phases of Leyte Gulf.

Isn't the requirement for play space the main reason GHQ went to 1/2400 scale, so you could use the same or similar rules in less space. Making range calculations on such a grand scale was interesting... but difficult to say the least before all the small range finders that are available now.

Will
ComOpsCtr

Azure · Post by **Azure** » Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:32 am

Thanks all for the replies! It was CA 71, the later one (i think it was named in honor of the earlier one lost at Savo Island)
It would be nice if GHQ would do 1/1200 scale, a lot more detail in that scale i think-but i guess since these are gaming models, making them in the smaller scale makes sense, though ill admit, given a choice, i would pick 1 /1200, that would make a ship like the quincy about 7" long if i am correct? Thanks again, Azure (BTW ill look into that 1/1200 metal one, that would be a good scale for the model i wish to make)

Azure · Post by **Azure** » Sat Jul 01, 2006 10:53 pm

Thanks for pointing me in the direction of the Neptun model....one Baltimore class CA is on its way....and they arent cheap. For display, this is one beautiful model....but i think i would be afraid to game with model ships that cost 68.00 (the baltimore i bought) to 130 or more for ** CENSORED ** class carriers, etc., though a battle group of those would be BREATHTAKING. For grins, i also am ordering a GHQ one...wanna see how it compares (with allowances for bein 1/2 size, of course)
(ill post pics of both Quincy's once i get them and get them painted)
Any suggestions on how to make a good base?
Thanks again to all for all the help, Azure

Mickel · Post by **Mickel** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:43 pm

Remember to go to shipcamouflage.com to get the camouflage right!

You have three choices, all vertical sufaces navy blue (1943), or all vertical surfaces to the lowest point of the deck navy blue and all vertical surfaces above that haze grey (1945), or go all out and paint her in MS32/18d, which is a disruptive pattern of light grey, ocean grey and dull black (1944). There's a colour plate showing both patterns on Canberra in the Sqn/Signals books US Heavy Cruisers Pt 2 - she was in the same scheme. All horizontal surfaces are deck blue. GHQ probably has all of those colours in their range.

Donald M. Scheef · Post by **Donald M. Scheef** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:07 am

To ComOpsCtr:

The game you describe is Fletcher Pratt's Naval Wargame. The game rules are available from ALNAVCO. There is a long history to this set of rules. It was developed in the 1920/1930s. One of the stories I have heard is that FP and friends played a scenario involving a German pocket battleship versus several small British cruisers a few weeks before the Battle of the River Platt and got almost the same results as the historical event.
I learned to play this about 100 miles east of you at Purdue. It is still my favorite set of naval wargame rules because of what you describe - you have to guess/estimate the range just as the actual gun control. The disadvantage is that turns take much longer than for most other rules.
One thing to be aware of - in Fletcher Pratt, the number of hits you get depend on "landing" your shells on the ship. Since FP was designed for 1/1200 scale, if you play with 1/2400 scale ships, you get only 1/4 the number of hits.

D. Scheef

jb · Post by jb » Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:55 am

Donald M. Scheef wrote:To ComOpsCtr:

The game you describe is Fletcher Pratt's Naval Wargame. The game rules are available from ALNAVCO. There is a long history to this set of rules. It was developed in the 1920/1930s. One of the stories I have heard is that FP and friends played a scenario involving a German pocket battleship versus several small British cruisers a few weeks before the Battle of the River Platt and got almost the same results as the historical event.
I learned to play this about 100 miles west of you at Purdue. It is still my favorite set of naval wargame rules because of what you describe - you have to guess/estimate the range just as the actual gun control. The disadvantage is that turns take much longer than for most other rules.
One thing to be aware of if - in Fletcher Pratt, the number of hits you get depend on "landing" your shells on the ship. Since FP was designed for 1/1200 scale, if you play with 1/2400 scale ships, you get only 1/4 the number of hits.

D. Scheef

...we used to make "rangefinders" to play this game. It was just a simple method of triangulating. Use a base,with 2 cigar tubes to look at the target through. 1 cigar tube is fixed,and the other swings.the one that swings has a pointer on it. when you line the target up with the fixed sight,you would also get the same sight picture with the swinging tube. The pointer on the swinging tube would point at known measured increments,thus giving us a very close approximate range...
Like you said a lot of detail in the game,and turns took forever...

tstockton · Post by **tstockton** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:45 pm

JB,

..we used to make "rangefinders" to play this game. It was just a simple method of triangulating. Use a base,with 2 cigar tubes to look at the target through. 1 cigar tube is fixed,and the other swings.the one that swings has a pointer on it. when you line the target up with the fixed sight,you would also get the same sight picture with the swinging tube. The pointer on the swinging tube would point at known measured increments,thus giving us a very close approximate range...

Wow... a stereo rangefinder with a base of at least 250 (scale) feet -- you had a huge advantage of the poor 1:1200 scale blokes manning their puny rangerfinders!!

Actually, the method you describe is pretty cool, in the way you simulated a very important part of naval gunnery! We played Alnavco's SEAPOWER for years, but never thought to simulate that part of the battles -- we simply took a tape measure and measured the distance (we used the bow of each ship as the "reference point", playing at 1" = 100 yards).

Thanks for sharing!

Regards,
Tom

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:58 pm

="tstockton"
Wow... a stereo rangefinder with a base of at least 250 (scale) feet -- you had a huge advantage of the poor 1:1200 scale blokes manning their puny rangerfinders!!

1/1200 scale irises are a little rare.

The event of floors with regularly repeating patterns and calculators put an end to ranging games. Along with knowledge of Pythagoras.

Donald M. Scheef · Post by **Donald M. Scheef** » Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:06 am

We also used home-made range-finders, as well as taking advantage of patterned floors. (I had never thought about the significance that standard linoleum tile in the US is 12 inches on a side until I started playing FP.) However, we were expected to do the calculations in our heads. By common agreement, electronic calculators (actually, slide rules when I started) were forbidden. Whenever possible for serious games, we tried to arrange a basement room (with concrete floors) or one of the meeting rooms at the Student Commons that was carpeted with a non-repeating pattern.

One historical effect that carried through to playing FP was "chasing the splashes." Shell splashes were indicated by upside-down golf tees. You could tell how your range estimates corresponded to the actual ranges by looking at the splashes. If, for example, your splashes were all beyond the target, you knew to reduce the range on the next turn. Knowing that your opponent was going to be doing this, you would change your course towards the previous set of his splashes.

Sometimes this worked wonders, with your opponent firing short on one turn and long on the next. Other times, you walked right into the middle of his ladder. (I know that he knows that I know ...) You also had to allow for your own maneuvering in adjusting your own fire.

I developed the habit of always kneeling between my opponent and my ship while moving to block his view of how I was maneuvering. Of course, we had to move out of the way when moving was finished, but hiding the actual movement helped conceal your path. At the same time, I was watching over my shoulder to see what the opponent was doing (if he let me).

D. Scheef

Donald M. Scheef · Post by **Donald M. Scheef** » Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:45 am

This corrects statements that I made in an earlier posting. I stated that ALNAVCO carries Fletcher Pratt's Naval Wargame. I recently checked on their website. Although their "History" section includes a description of the game, it appears that it is no longer on sale. Also, this source states that the game was published in 1940 rather than about 1930 as I had thought. A brief search for other sources failed to reveal any sellers.

D. Scheef