-
Modelers Alliance has updated the forum software on our website. We have migrated all post, content and user accounts but we could not migrate the passwords.
This requires that you manually reset your password.
Please click here, http://modelersalliance.org/forums/login to go to logon page and use the "Forgot your Password" option.
Trumpeter 1:200 Arizona
- Thread starter Heavens Eagle
- Start date
Great job on the portholes. 
Heavens Eagle
Well-known member
The replacement portholes ended up working quite nicely Chuck. If I were going to make more I would do a little rework to the master though. If you guys ask nice I might be talked into making two or three batches so you could use them on your builds.
Have been doing a bit of work on the Az lately.
Basically lots of little stuff on ONE BIG PART!
Have the portholes mostly all reworked including the ones molded in the hull. Turns out they are way too pronounced in the molding compared to photos.
This has been easily fixed by drilling them out and then I used a stone setting burr to open them up even further by hand. A little light sanding with VERY FINE (1200 grit or so) sand paper and some of the long skinny sticks got the porthole frames to a thin narrow ring for the most part. Looks much better. Now for some Mr Surfacer to help get rid of the fine scratches.
In addition I have spent almost all weekend on the net doing research. The Az was being constantly changed and upgraded it seems. The hard part being finding out just what was done just prior to Dec 7 1941. The biggest controversy is about what color she was. It is pretty much certain that the mast tops were an off white/light grey, BUT was she a dark sea grey, a medium blue grey, some mix as repaint was still in process (according to one Az survivor) or what.
From what I have seen from other builds and "my" interpretation of B&W photos is that a dark gull grey with a lot of shading and highlighting will work about the best. It also has a touch of a blue grey that seems to work well.
Tons of little things to add and change including a fair bit around where the anchors go. In addition I will be following a couple of builds to add some plate and surface detail to the "smoothie" hull. No cuttie-n-choppie on the hull but there will be some work there.
Still have a lot of reading and studying to do, and I'm not all that confident that it will be done this year.
Have been doing a bit of work on the Az lately.
Basically lots of little stuff on ONE BIG PART!
Have the portholes mostly all reworked including the ones molded in the hull. Turns out they are way too pronounced in the molding compared to photos.
This has been easily fixed by drilling them out and then I used a stone setting burr to open them up even further by hand. A little light sanding with VERY FINE (1200 grit or so) sand paper and some of the long skinny sticks got the porthole frames to a thin narrow ring for the most part. Looks much better. Now for some Mr Surfacer to help get rid of the fine scratches.
In addition I have spent almost all weekend on the net doing research. The Az was being constantly changed and upgraded it seems. The hard part being finding out just what was done just prior to Dec 7 1941. The biggest controversy is about what color she was. It is pretty much certain that the mast tops were an off white/light grey, BUT was she a dark sea grey, a medium blue grey, some mix as repaint was still in process (according to one Az survivor) or what.
From what I have seen from other builds and "my" interpretation of B&W photos is that a dark gull grey with a lot of shading and highlighting will work about the best. It also has a touch of a blue grey that seems to work well.
Tons of little things to add and change including a fair bit around where the anchors go. In addition I will be following a couple of builds to add some plate and surface detail to the "smoothie" hull. No cuttie-n-choppie on the hull but there will be some work there.
Still have a lot of reading and studying to do, and I'm not all that confident that it will be done this year.
Duke Maddog
Well-known member
This may take more than a year, but I'll be watching it the whole time. It's going to be well worth the wait.
Heavens Eagle
Well-known member
Thanks Ed. I found it (and read the whoooole thing) this weekend. Noticed your name on there and figured it was the same guy.
Yup learned a LOT which should help keep me out of trouble. :hmmm :evil:
Thanks Ed. I found it (and read the whoooole thing) this weekend. Noticed your name on there and figured it was the same guy.
Yup learned a LOT which should help keep me out of trouble. :hmmm :evil:
Yup. I CORNfess. I is a member over there... Glad ya found it useful :drinks
Skinny_Mike
Well-known member
:yipee
Looking good so far!
Looking good so far!
Heavens Eagle
Well-known member
I have some new photos for everyone. Tried to upload these last nite but Pucket was buggered. Anyway here we go:
The bulge I am referring to is right there at the front of the bow. Instead of coming straight to a point, it bulges out a little on the sides right at the front. That shouldn't be there for sure. I do have an idea to deal with it once I have reached the point where the upper and lower hull parts have been joined. :hmmm
Today I am going to check out someones claim that the upper deck should be taller by another 4.5mm. That is a rather large amount that the upper deck would need to be raised up. I will do some photo work and compare to the tweaked ORIGINAL drawings that I have a copy of. I am simply going to set the top and bottom hull parts together. Take them out and set them on top of the back fence and get back as far as my camera zoom will let me and take a few pics.
Then I will compare to the side view drawing above. I expect some bits slightly off, but I believe the folks that are doing the most complaining are using 3rd party drawings which could be most of the problem. Using the General plans I could generate some cross sections If I really wanted to, but then the model would take forever and a day to build and that is a few days too long.
WE WILL SEE! :skipper
The bulge I am referring to is right there at the front of the bow. Instead of coming straight to a point, it bulges out a little on the sides right at the front. That shouldn't be there for sure. I do have an idea to deal with it once I have reached the point where the upper and lower hull parts have been joined. :hmmm
Today I am going to check out someones claim that the upper deck should be taller by another 4.5mm. That is a rather large amount that the upper deck would need to be raised up. I will do some photo work and compare to the tweaked ORIGINAL drawings that I have a copy of. I am simply going to set the top and bottom hull parts together. Take them out and set them on top of the back fence and get back as far as my camera zoom will let me and take a few pics.
Then I will compare to the side view drawing above. I expect some bits slightly off, but I believe the folks that are doing the most complaining are using 3rd party drawings which could be most of the problem. Using the General plans I could generate some cross sections If I really wanted to, but then the model would take forever and a day to build and that is a few days too long.
WE WILL SEE! :skipper
Last edited:
You've really been doing some homework Paul.
Heavens Eagle
Well-known member
You've really been doing some homework Paul.
Actually I am building on other folks research. Just doing the proving with all the info.
I have the proof on the side view and deck height for the Az. So far Trumpy seems to have done better than most of the folks are saying in my research.
As I have stated before, the hand drawn originals in my opinion are the BEST source of sizing and details. I have found one inconsistency on them with 2 ladder/stairways on the front of the lower superstructure by the AA guns on either side of turret 2. I will have to find a photo with the ballistic shields in place to determine which location they go.
As to the side view compared to the photo everything really looks quite good. The only real deviations are circled in green and not really all that bad. Even the portholes on the 80+ year old drawing seem to match the model fairly well. So am quite happy about that.
So what do you think of the oval porthole corrections folks?
Last edited:
Paul, I'm glad to see you have found the link useful & Tracy White of Researcher@Large has done extensive research. He has personally spent many hours digging thru boxes & books at the National Archives over the years and in conjunction with Dana Bell have given us modelers alot of good info on the ol' gal.
On Tracy's site, there's even a diagram of the rigging for Arizona. :drinks
On Tracy's site, there's even a diagram of the rigging for Arizona. :drinks
Swordsman
Active member
Well Paul I've reviewed this build ... You've been very busy and the result shows ... I couldn't find any places where I had commented on your work ... I know I did just My computer's funny that way. I'll be getting new CPU soon ... as that's what win 10 wants ... Nice fix on the portholes ... she's looking very shipshape ... :captain 
Heavens Eagle
Well-known member
If you are referring to the drawing where they marked it up with all the Dec 7 damage, I grabbed it as well. While it does show a nice amount on the rigging, it only really gets things started. While I have a couple of books on the Az, it will still be "Best Educated Guess" on the rigging. That is a long ways off yet though. Have a lot of little things to build and paint before then Ed.
Time to play paper dolls on the bow part now. Much easier to tweak on the 'puter and cut once on the part.
Similar threads
