WAK USS Salt Lake City 1:200

[Michael Mash]

That is a very intersting hull construction technnique. I think a long time ago, somebody on this forum described a method similar to this, but I have never seen it done. It really looks very very smooth.

Note: Thanks to "Nimitz Fan". Your post about the naval treaties was a great piece of writing.

Mike

[georgerutherford1861]

This build is looking great!

Doug

[RAFleischman]

Thank you all for the kind words..

Yes, the hull plating technique is not my own, although I can't think of who wrote it up first. It might be in my long lamented USS San Fransisco build thread.

russ...

[WAK]

Good start
I've seen three built USS Salt Lake City. Soon, another US Navy heavy cruiser

[RelloemSualk]

Hey WAK, which one?
- Wichita class
- Baltomore class
- Oregon City class
- Des-Moines class
- Boston class (CAG) would be very nice ...

Give us some hints
Regards SY190

[RAFleischman]

A new model of a US heavy cruiser...a Northampton class would be my choice!

[Don Boose]

I agree that another treaty cruiser would be great. I have enjoyed watching this build and reading your narrative and the well-informed inputs from NimitzFan.

The following (which I think I previously posted in another cruiser thread) is from a review I wrote for Global War Studies of Leo J. Daugherty III, Pioneers of Amphibious Warfare, 1898-1945: Profiles of Fourteen American Military Strategists, Jefferson, NC, and London: McFarland & Co., 2009:

In his chapter on Admiral Ansel, Daugherty does a fine job of explaining naval gunfire and demonstrating Ansel’s specific contributions. But he also says he will “examine the effects of naval disarmament talks that affected both naval gunnery and the displacement of the type of guns and calibers of guns on the ships constructed during the interwar period, since they became determining factors when Ansel and others [wrote] the chapter [of the Tentative Landing Force Manual] on naval gunfire . . .”[p. 298] However, the treaty-inspired changes to U.S. Navy ordnance had not yet taken effect when Ansel was writing his portion of the Tentative Manual and Daugherty’s actual discussion of the impact of the treaty is limited to the statement that “the disarmament treaties . . . had virtually stripped the U.S. Navy of any meaningful offensive power . . .” [p. .303] This is debatable, for the treaties had beneficial as well as deleterious effects. The strictures of the 1930 London Treaty, for example, led to the development of “light” cruisers that were indistinguishable from “heavy” cruisers except for their six-inch gun armament. As a result of Navy efforts to maximize the firepower of these cruisers within the treaty limitations, the U.S. Navy entered the war with a class of light cruisers each mounting fifteen six-inch guns, roughly equivalent to a battalion of 155mm artillery. These ships provided outstanding service as naval gunfire support ships throughout the war. Ansel commanded one of those formidable light cruisers, USS Philadelphia, when it helped suppress German artillery at Anzio and Southern France. Daugherty notes that “Ansel applied the lessons on naval gunfire he had written about fourteen years earlier at Quantico with deadly effect,” but fails to mention that Philadelphia with its deadly armament was in part the result of the naval limitation treaties. [p. 317. For a synopsis of the complex interrelationship between the naval treaty restrictions and the development of U.S. warships in the 1930s, see Thomas C. Hone and Trent Hone, Battle Line: The United States Navy, 1919-1939 (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2006), pp. 1-18, and Norman Friedman, U.S. Cruisers: An Illustrated Design History (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1984), pp. 4-5, 109-111, 163-168, and 217-18. For the development of the Brooklyn and St. Louis class heavily-armed light cruisers (of which, Philadelphia was one) see Friedman, pp.183-198, 203-207. Friedman argues that “It is clear from contemporary documents that there never would have been any Brooklyns had it not been for a radical change in treaty rules occasioned by the London Treaty for 1930” and that the major wartime cruisers (designed and built free of treaty restrictions) “were evolved directly from the Brooklyn design.” Friedman, p. 183.]

A recent book on the treaty cruisers (and other treaty ships) is John Jordan, Warships After Washington: The Development of the Five Major Fleets 1922-1930, Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2011 [originally published by Seaforth Publishing, Barnsley UK, 2011].

Don

[RAFleischman]

Don, have you read Warships After Washington?I've seen it on Amazon and have been thinking about picking it up.

russ...

[Don Boose]

Russ –

I have the book.

John Jordan is the current editor of the annual publication Warship, which contains detailed and well-documented articles on warship development and related issues. Judging from the bibliography and notes, Jordan wrote this book based on thorough study of the secondary sources. I don’t see much evidence of primary research, and the documentation is thin (few citations of archival or other primary sources other than the records of the Washington conferences), but the sources he has used are highly credible. I judge it to be a reliable reference work.

The book begins with an examination of the post-WWI navies and the plans of the five major victorious powers for future naval construction. Jordon then provides a detailed discussion of the Washington Conference and treaty, providing the political and technological context, recapitulating the major arguments and disagreements, and assessing the outcome for the participants. He follows this with a series of chapters that deal with the major classes of warships: capital ships, “The Treaty Cruiser” [presumably of special interest to you], the development of the aircraft carrier, the intermediate ships [French contre-torpilleurs, the Italian Condottieri light cruisers, and the like; submarines; and destroyers. He concludes with a chapter on the later Geneva and London conferences.

The focus of the book is the impact of the 1922 Washington Treaty, so the detailed discussion deals with the first generations of treaty ships. There is a brief discussion in the final chapter of the London Treaty division of cruisers into 8-inch and 6-inch categories, with mention of the U.S. Brooklyns as responses to the Japanese Mogamis (as originally armed with 15 16.1-inch guns), but no detailed discussion.

If a $36.00 book fits into your budget, I believe you would find this to be a useful and interesting book. It certainly fits into your interest in the treaty cruisers.

If you are reading this, NimitzFan, and if you have seen the book, I would value your opinion.

Don

[RAFleischman]

Don, thanks for the info on the book...It's on my wishlist for when "The Big Man" comes to visit next month!

The idea that the design drawings for these ships were drawn by hand is just mindboggling! I would love to see the drawings!

The underwater portion of the hull plates are done. I always have problems with the last couple of plates on each end! I couldn't find anything in the instructions about the card thickness I should use when laminating the deck. I used 1mm, but probably should have used 0.5mm. I may have some problems with the fit on the stern. I have lots o' edge painting to do now.

It's good to see Salt Lake City & Suzuya upright and side by side.

russ...