Since the 1/350 kit will be out soon, a cool photo of USS Texas, a photo from their FB site:
This is creditied as coming from 1941, but which month is not spcified.
The color of the deck is strijung, As is the detail of having a hawser flaked out on fthe orward turret.roof.
Never thought that she had white gun barrels. All the pictures I have seen of her with grey barrels. It looks like the turrets are painted the same color.
The US Navy was still painted in Standard Navy Gray #5 during the first part of 1941. The light color you see is that, not white.
Tracy of Researcher@Large may be along momentarily with a link to the order text, but it wasn’t until the end of April that the order came out of BUSHIPS to turn in stocks of SNG5 and begin painting into 5D Dark Gray
Cameras do not do a good job of representing gray level of subject. Auto exposure adjusts for brightness of light, destroying actual gray level of surface.
The guns and turrets are painted with lighter grey than the hull and deck equipment. I would have thought the ship would be in one color.
I’ve been fortunate to be able to explore that ship top to bottom and being a native Texan she has a special place in my modeling heart. So…WHAT’S THE DEAL WITH A 1/350 KIT??? WHO?? WHEN??? I WANNA KNOW!!!
Free Time Hobbies is taking pre-orders on a Trumpeter 1/350 kit of Texas. Have not hear a release date, but they just released the New York.
Here’s a few pictures of her as she sits today…
(http://s759.photobucket.com/user/rmarotta_photos/media/IMG_0940_zps44e149d5.jpg.html)]
(http://s759.photobucket.com/user/rmarotta_photos/media/IMG_0906_zps08f31e91.jpg.html)]
(http://s759.photobucket.com/user/rmarotta_photos/media/IMG_0943_zpsa00748dd.jpg.html)]
(http://s759.photobucket.com/user/rmarotta_photos/media/IMG_0942_zpsf6db79c5.jpg.html)]
Is that a colorized photo? The photo should be 60-80 years old, and that is wonderfully sharp quality. The gun barrels seem extra light, the waterways seem especially dark, the deck seems extra brownish, even for being soaked with water, and the hawser seems to me to have an odd color.
Lovely art, but is it original?
strijung ? Not a term/color I’m familiar with. Would you clarify, please ?
But regardless, a very dramatic photo and the details you point out should make a build very much better.
Duster, I think it’s a typo and he meant striking.
Groot
Not really. The VERTICAL surfaces, including the hull and turrets, were painted “#5 Standard Navy Gray” whereas horizontal metal surfaces were painted in #20 Deck Gray. This was the standard from about 1921 to early 1941. There is some thought that SOME deck surfaces were covered in linoleum, (see the platform deck these sailors are standing on the battleship Idaho) but there’s no documentation to confirm or detail this yet. Here’s a few color photos showing other ships in this scheme:
http://images.google.com/hosted/life/27c6a293ce93088c.html
http://images.google.com/hosted/life/ad7f89c993d6a655.html
http://images.google.com/hosted/life/6499ec6b8461bda8.html
http://images.google.com/hosted/life/e8c7b5e87e7dcf29.html
As far as to the WHEN of this photo, I have nothing to doubt their statement of 1941. The updated patterns that battleships were painted into after the pre-war scheme wasn’t officially ordered until January of 1941, and there were production and distribution problems with the new paints that pushed deployment back. Late May is our best guess for the Pacific Fleet, but it wasn’t finished before the beginning of June. Atlantic Fleet had shorter supply lines than Hawaii, so maybe it was a bit quicker, but there was still the production and distribution delays. The last two times I’ve tried to get into the CINC Atlantic Fleet files I’ve been stymied by availability (they took them “out of circulation” for maintenance) and competing projects.
Tracy,
I pre-order the model with Free Time the other day, so yesterday I went to Wikipedia to get a count of her guns and type and low and behold there is a black and white picture taken in 1941 showing the lighter grey topside. If the picture was in color I am positive that it would have been a perfect match of CapntMac82 picture.
I assumed that the color as she sits in Texas were always her color.
Marcus
Texas wore at least four different camouflage measures according to what I see in the ShipCamouflage.com database. We don’t strictly know at this time what her fit will be in the kit, but I"m guessing 1944/45. For 1944 Normandy operations, go with Measure 22. Following Operation Overlord, she went back to the states for repair and overhaul and was painted in a dazzle scheme for a short period of time at the end of 1944. In the Pacific, she was painted in Measure 21, which is what she is also painted in today.
Yes, I did mean “striking” in referring to the deck color. Now, my fingers may have been trying to type “intriguing” at the same time, too.
The color of the wood "reads’ as a very rich reddish hue, one I’ve not seen even in newly-hewn teak. But, may be the origin of tales that Texas had been (re)decked in south Texas cypress.
That color, though, would be a good match ofr the reports from WWII sailors (thanks TPW) that the signal platforms, and searchlight platforms that “russet leather” linoleum over the steel decks.
Against that is the photography issues the photo has. For that sea state, it’s almost certainly overcast, probably close to dark. The photographer has used a mix of f-stop and exposure time to collect that photo, and proably an equal amount of time printing that negative on the enlarger, too. So, the lighter grays are going to be washed out and pale. just as the sea scans as near black.
To Mr. McBean–Texas has only worn her Sea Blue paint scheme since her refurbishment in the '80s. before that, she wore an odd mix of pre & post war ‘haze’ gray paint. The accuracy of the paint (& paint scheme) was of a similar quality to the concrete poured upon her main deck replacing the wooden deck. Which, i nsome fairness, was in keeping with fitting her out with Kingfisher float planes, and the 1.1" “Chicago organs” in her AA positions. This was how I first experienced her in the '70s as a school kid
The wood is also wet, which brings out more vibrant colors.
Navy Blue. Sea Blue was a lighter color that did not survive 1942. Both are available as paints for models, so we need to be precise when discussing the paint color in this regard.
Thank you for that clarification. The Texas Parks & Wildlife people–when I asked–stated that they have a vendor for the paint ,and labels it as “sea blue” which has stuck with me (and shouldn’t). The paint is a compromise of long-lasting, inexpensive, and “close” to correct color.
While at mea culpa, I need to state that the photo is from the “All About Texas” Facebook site, and just shared with the “Save the Battleship Texas” FB page.
For what it’s worth, that photo isn’t really a “new” one. It’s been on her Navsource page for a while and was posted on one of the semi-official Texas pages before that, I think.It is quite striking and a rare color shot, for sure.
Fortunately or unfortunately, there is no standard for color names, so Sea and Navy blue can vary wildly. based on manufacturer.
I made a donation of some artifacts to Texas, and got to visit with the Ships’ Curator for a long spell. During that time, I asked him if he was ever pestered by researchers wanting documentary evidence of this, that, or the other thing. This evinced a chuckle, and a bit of a change of topic, in telling about, how early on, TPW was amazed at the quantity of paint needed to maintain “just one ship.”
I can believe it. A lot of what I would consider “junior” researchers (not really the best term for it but it’s better than “haven’t had the opportunity to really research with a ship and at various archival sources yet”) will want to start with a ship, but they don’t understand that the Navy rarely turns over any real documentation with a ship other than some technical information. I’m currently assisting Battleship Iowa in collecting documentation for the ship - I’ve hit the Seattle Regional branch (Puget Sound Naval Shipyard) already and will be at DC later this month for the BuShips files. There’s also potential for information in the facilities at San Francisco and Riverside as well as various “Forward Command” records probably in DC. Really, to know “all” about a ship takes a lot of work and one has to recognize that most of the correspondence is probably already gone, as are a lot of “obsolete” drawings.
