Just got a note from Great MOdels that my pre-order Sa Francisco is finally enroute to me.


I need help from the experts here so Martinn....Tracy..

I want to call the kit the Tuscaloosa. Now I know there are always differences btwn ships of the same class, but in my way of doing things, reasonablly close is good enough. Say you were looking at the two ships from a 1000 yards away, would there be any major noticieable differences? Could I get by straight out of the box calling the kit the Tuscaloosa. I am looking for something same time frame-ish.

I noticed looking at a ships history that the 'Loosa spent most of her career in the Atlantic. Was there ever a time she was in the same exercise or grouping as the Alabama?

Steve,

First and foremost (besides the fact I'm no expert!), it's your model. Have fun with it and build it however you want. As long as you have fun!

As for changing San Fran into Tuscaloosa, here is what Dick J posted over on Modelwarships (and Steel Navy too, I believe), in regards to that very question:

What you must modify depends on the timeframe you want to depict. It looks like the San Fran will be the 1942 version, so I will stick with that. I will list the major differences for Tuscaloosa that I am aware of.

First, the bridge. Tuscaloosa was the first to have the Communications bridge level glassed in. (The level below the navigation bridge.) That level was 1 1/2 levels in height, and Tuscaloosa was glassed in with the windows the "normal" height above the existing deck, with "blank" space above the windows. Some view forward was blocked by turret II, so San Fran (and Astoria and Minneapolis) had a new deck added 1/2 level above the original comm bridge deck, and then it was glassed in at that level. (Placing the windows immediately below the nav-bridge deck.) Not having seen the actual kit, I can't be specific about the needed plastic surgery. However, the windows and deck will have to be lowered without lowering the nav-bridge.

Second, Tuscaloosa had a 20MM gallery added around the front of the bridge, 1/2 level above the comm-bridge deck (or where the "new" deck would have been on the other 3 mentioned units). 4 20MM were carried there.

Third, the rangefinder above the bridge still had the original (as built) angled surrounding shield on Tuscaloosa, while San Fran had an enlarged vertical shield that also held 2 20MM. (Equates to 2 of the 4 20MM on the gallery)

Fourth, the main-deck 5" positions were slightly different. On San Fran (and the others in the class) the middle gun of the 3 main deck guns on each side was inset slightly closer to the centerline than the guns immediately forward and aft. (The splinter screens barely hung over the deck-edge on the center guns, while the next ahead and behind had a significant overhang.) On Tuscaloosa, it was the aftermost gun on each side that was inset.

Fifth, the searchlight tower on Tuscaloosa rested entirely on the intake vent between the funnels, and was therefore narrower (fore-and-aft) than the corresponding one on the San Fran, the corners of which rested on the deck foreward and aft of the vent. New Orleans, Astoria, and Minneapolis had towers like San Fran, while Quincy's and Vincennes's were closer to Tuscaloosa's.

Lastly, the 20MM gallery around the after controls (high above turret III) carried 2 20MM on Tuscaloosa, and 4 on the San Fran. (The 2 missing guns correspond to the other 2 on the Tuscaloosa's bridge gallery, giving both ships a total of 12 20MM at this time.)

Even still, timeframe is everything. Tuscaloosa didn't have any 20MM until at least the summer of '42, so you can find MS-12R photos of her without them. But then, you would have to locate the .50 cal guns, and obtain more ship's boats. The 20MM appear to have been added in stages, so you may see photos with only part of them on board. You have to decide on the exact timeframe, and then decide how much you want to do. It looks as though the kit may give a good starting point, and the changes are probably all very "doable".

Glad you had that... I'm not a cruiser guy

Steve, I did a quick and dirty search, and it appears the answer to that question is a qualified no.

Tuscaloosa joined 3rd Fleet at Ulithi in January 1945 although I don't have the exact date. She had sailed via the Panama Canal, San Diego and Pearl Harbor,

Alabama left Ulithi on December 24, 1944 and sailed to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard entering drydock on January 18, 1945.

It IS possible that the two were together during this period at Pearl Harbor. I know Tuscaloosa stopped there and did some exercises, and Alabama also stopped over at Pearl where she picked up her new skipper before heading back to Puget Sound. They MAY have been at Pearl at the same time and while I have no documentation of it, Alabama MAY have been involved in those exercises.


After Alabama returned to the Pacific both ships were off Okinawa for a short while with Alabama arriving in early May of 1945 but she was with TF 58 protecting the fast carriers while Tuscaloosa was with the shore bombardment group.

Alabama left in mid June to go to Leyte (again with the fast carriers of 3rd fleet) and then on July 1st headed to the main Japanese Islands to conduct shore bombardment with other fast battleships.

Tuscaloosa had arrived at Leyte on July 1st, (at the same time Alabama left) having departed from Okinawa and reported to 7th fleet. She remained around the Phillipines until the end of August when she headed toward Korea and Manchuria.

So while they may have crossed paths at Pearl, been off Okinawa at the same time, and passed each other off Leyte, it doesn't appear they ever operated together.

Thanks for all the great info guys. Despite my great affinity for Tuscaloosa, Alabama, I may have to pass on the Tuscaloosa part. I don't want to start hacking at kit. Perhaps a YKM conversion kit will hit the market and I can look into that method. No I'll just wait for a pe set to throw into box and place it in the stash.