[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Posted by Ralph Wood on May 31, 2025, 12:36:53, in reply to "Re: Aha! Discovery..."
And this is why having you here is invaluable! Thank you. 
Now, quoting from the movie "Airplane!"..."Johnny, what can you make out of this?"
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/USS_Enterprise_%28CV-6%29_anchored_on_the_Hudson_River_in_October_1945.jpg
Caption with it is:
"English: The U.S. Navy aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CV-6) anchored in the Hudson River, off New York City (USA), at the time of the Navy Day Fleet Review, circa late October 1945."
(And Johnny's reply is, "Oooo! I can make a hat, or a brooch, or a pterodactyl...!")
She still seems disassembled to me. My eyes are bad, and I was never good at picking anything out of old low resolution black and white photos. I can't tell what I am seeing, even times when I actually know what I am supposed to be looking at. And, the more I enlarge, the more pixilation and blur I get. So, having the experts here and participating is fantastic.
I read that she was outfitted with extra racks, and used as a troop transport for Magic Carpet, bringing troops back from overseas. Do you know if she ever then got assembled, or more nearly fully assembled, at any point?
Thank you! 
Previous Message
Actually, the final fit was more complete than you indicate. Like most ships of the time, she had to fit through the Panama Canal. Many features were designed for partial dismantling (unbolted rather than cut off). Therefore the positions for the quad 40MM at the hangar level port side forward had been fitted and then disassembled for transit at the time of the photos, as had the outer tips of the bow quad and twin tubs. Also, an additional port side quad amidships was fitted at catwalk level then removed for transit, but the lower portion of the supports are still visible is photos, as is the associated director tub in the catwalk slightly further forward. The hangar level quad tubs forward of the port hangar crane have been partially removed for the transit, but the quads remain in place. The drawing also depicts a quad on the clipping room by the crane aft of the island. A twin was located there because a quad would have interfered with operation of the crane. That is why Enterprise moved that mount's replacement to the catwalk further aft when the 40MM were first installed in 1942. (Hornet had her quad 1.1 in that after position in anticipation of eventual replacement by 40MM.) In short, many features of the drawing do not reflect the reality of what was mounted (or even planned) for the ship, and it shouldn't be taken as a guide. The photos you referenced were taken enroute to Panama, not simply upon leaving the yard, so she was fully prepped for the transit. Previous Message
With the line drawings for guidance, I started to look at photos, and chose to start by verifying the absence of a 40mm bow mount in 1945. In verifying that, I discovered a series of photos taken on September 13, 1945 by the Puget Sound Navy Yard of Enterprise as she was leaving the yard after repairs/refitting from a kamikaze attack on May 14th. They are very instructive. The war ended while Enterprise was undergoing this refit, and it was never completed. She left the yard "early," and incomplete.
Therefore, the undated late fit line drawing is of the INTENDED armament, had the refit been completed. And the notes on that drawing are of what actually was fitted vs. what that drawing shows was intended. (And this explains why that drawing is so hard to find while the 1938, '42, '44 series is so much easier to come by. Those were actual fits. That drawing is hypothetical only.)
What gives it all away most obviously is the photo at the top of this item:
https://en.namu.wiki/w/USS%20%EC%97%94%ED%84%B0%ED%94%84%EB%9D%BC%EC%9D%B4%EC%A6%88%20 (CV-6)
And the preview shows the damned link goes to another--Star Trek--page. However, if you look, it says, "The actual ship that served as the motif for this shipthe contents aboutUSS Enterprise (CV-6) documentcastPlease note." And "Enterprise CV-6" is hypertexted. Click that to finally get to page I want to link. Sheesh!!
This is the most commonly encountered photo of the series of 4 that Puget Sound shot. Google-->Enterprise Puget Sound 13 September 1945, and select images. They should all come up, though I can not find a single source with them together. There is the above photo, one from the port quarter, from the stern, and the starboard quarter.
Looking at the above photo, notice the empty sponson forward below the flight deck, just aft the 5 inch mounts. That's why the note on the drawing says "delete." Those 40mm were never actually installed, though the sponson shows they had planned to. So, the Wiki armament listing for "September 1945" is missing the word "planned," or "intended," or some other indication that it was only how she would have left the yard had the war still been happening.
Further regarding the link I have given here... Note this item also contains an armament listing similar to Wiki's (but adds the late 1942 fit Dick has already given us, and only has 1945, not September 1945 for the final fit...still lacking wording that this was intended, not actual.) Also, it gives the three "valid" line drawings...'38, '42, '44 again.
So... Anyone choosing to build a model according to the late fit diagram is building a what-if, or else is correct ting it according to photos and the notes.
Previous Message
Well...
I have found drawings. However, counting up the guns on those drawings does not exactly match the Wiki listings. Which entry is in error...Wiki, or these artists...I could not say. You will get "the general idea" at least, of how her armament evolved.
See the line drawings on this page comparing 1938, 1942, and 1944:
http://www.maquetland.com/article-893-usa-marine-uss-entreprise-cv-6-part-2-english-version
Now, see the undated line drawing a short way down from the top of this page:
https://www.themodellingnews.com/2020/09/preview-mengs-new-1700th-scale-uss.html?m=1
I have no idea what the notes alongside the drawing in this last link are about, and there's no caption explaining. Changing the quad 40 mm to twins looks like back dating, but changing the single 20 mm to twins is forward dating. If you compare this image with the one labeled as 1944 in the top link, you will see this image is definitely a later fit...it has been upgunned. More quad 40 mm mounts added, and the original twin 40s changed to quads. Further regarding the 40 mm's...note the bow twin mount in the '44 drawing is gone in the later drawing (the change of the forward twins to quads was deemed sufficient forward protection.) Note also two twin 40 mm guns just aft of the after 5 inch guns, and they stay twin from '44 to '45. I count 56 40 mm guns in the undated (but obviously later) drawing while Wiki claims 54 40 mm. So, all the "deleted" and "40mm twin " notations along the sides doesn't make sense. Only one quad mount needs to be changed to get 54 guns. That drawing is deleting way too many. No idea what those notes are about. Previous Message
Does anyone have a drawing, diagram or picture of ENTERPRISES Sept 1945 AA fit. Thank you.
Responses
