Hey guys,
I've been reading with interest all the comments about the P/MI vs EB limbers etc. and all I can say is more research awaits. I've looked a a lot of pics and I've got some opinions on the subjuct (subject to revisions when I'm proven wrong). I don't feel the pressure hull influenced the superstructure very much at this point. Pics show the P/MI boats early on were sloped very evenly and did not have the "curvy" bit that shows prominently in some pics. Look at Silversides, Wahoo, and other early examples. I do see in Alden's book on p 116 a pic of Balao (Ports) launching in 1942 with the "swoopy" surerstructure but without the extrs row of limber holes. It appears to be something of a bulge in the super. plating although I don't know the reason for it. I don't know if MI turned to this configuration at the same time frame or later or even at all. The EB boats seem to not have this particular thing going on. It all points to more research to do. I think there was not much mods. done to the deck or superstructure save the obvious limber variations and the tipped dive planes. I think it comes down to 3 basic versions of the superstructure.
1. EB style with limbers not following the bottom curve and the long drainage slot all the way aft.
2. P/MI early with limbers in a shallow slope, bottom edge gently curving almost meeting the hull, limber holes aft.
3. P poss. MI '42-'43 with the "bulge" and "curvy" bottom edge, original style limber holes fore and aft.
All of the above were modified at intervals with additional limber holes both in the superstructure and roundover.
Decking changed in mid war as teak became scarce and deck details are hard to find. The most obvious changes that affected theboats appearance were the changes both at re-fits and during construction to the fairwater and shears. Armament seemed to be at the commanders discretion.
More work to be done and patience is required for optimum results.