The Ship Model Forum

by **johndon** » Sun Aug 07, 2011 9:36 am

Looking very nice indeed David.

John

by **carr** » Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:43 am

I love the 8" elevator in the earlier post! I think you've entered the ranks of the scratch building masters. This is a great build!

by **navydavesof** » Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:20 am

I had a smaller stand for the Mk110 57mm gun to sit on, but I just could not get over the fact that it would be really, really hard to perform maintenance on the gun, like clean the gun barrel. "Punching" the barrel, like we navy folk say, would be super hard if the gun were sitting so high up off the deck without anyway to get on the same level with the gun. So I extended the deck house it was sitting on beyond the end of the gun barrel.

Disregard the Phalanx base on the #3 illuminator platform. That's where I was going to put the aft Phalanx CIWS mount until I figured out a better way to where I can maintain 3 Evolved Sea Sparrow (ESSM) target illuminators and Phalanx CIWS...

...like this!!!

Hardcore aft Phalanx CIWS position action. Like I mentioned last time, the mount's "chair", or maintenance compartment, is easily integrated into the auxillary generator exhause housing.

Here is an orientation of the amidships arrangement. The countermeasures deck is going to be set up differently than standard Flight IIA ships.

The high line kingposts have been repositioned forward and are mounted where the DDG-51 Flight IIA NULKA launchers are positioned. Because of this the NULKA launcher have to be repositioned. It turns out this is actually a really, really easy fix. Since it's a feature of the NULKA launchers themselves, the NULKA and some of the SRBOC chaff launchers will be integrated with each other.

: YKM35039.jpg (2.41 KiB) Viewed 1711 times

The other SRBOC launchers will be spread a little out on the countermeasures deck.

Here's a quick overall picture of the super structure from back to front.

So, here's progress for this week! Good times, guys. One project at a time = progress

by **navydavesof** » Sun Jul 31, 2011 1:39 am

Bill Liebold wrote:David,

Isn't it great when you turn the corner from scratch building stuff to painting and assembly? It's all down hill from there. I'll be watching the next step.

Bill

Thanks, Bill. Yeah, progression is great. It's these little things that wind up taking up a bunch of time, but a little progress each day makes for a lot of progression by the end of the week!

The addition today is now the deck detailing. When I sanded off the 32-cell VLS to replace it with a 64-cell a lot of things had to be re-fabricated. So here I had to make the 8" ammunition strike down elevator and ramp. I did this by gluing some square stock together to about the right width and doing a lot of sanding!

I then added the surface detail of the dogs on the sides of the hatch and two rails running down its center.

Here's the ramp. It was done in the same way, but it's just a lot bigger so the powered floor jack can drive up to the strike down elevator and transfer the pallets of ammunition onto it.

Here they are put together. The little flap on the right hand side of the ramp is a little bridge that flops over to the right and bridges the gap between ramp and the strike down elevator.

And in place:

Here's a little amidships fitting with the RHIBs and Bob's nemesis the dreaded unmanned mine hunter

...to the next post!

by **Bill Liebold** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:57 pm

David,

Isn't it great when you turn the corner from scratch building stuff to painting and assembly? It's all down hill from there. I'll be watching the next step.

Bill

by **navydavesof** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:16 am

Bill Liebold wrote:Nice progress so far.

Thanks, Bill! The "one-step at a time" is about to turn into "walking with haste".

We will see the progress I make in the week! There is not a lot more fabrication needed with these Burke variants. They are not like the Iowa modernization. That's a bit of a beast of little pieces.

by **Bill Liebold** » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:11 am

Nice progress so far.
Plastruct make some good stuff. I use a lot of their products. The glue is good but I still use the Tamiya stuff at home, for some reason my wife does not find the smell overly offensive. Then again you can get MEK by the gallon in your local big box home center and use the really nifty solvent dispenser that Plastruct sells, part #HT-612, and you can go to town. Then again I'm probally the only wacko that needs a gallon glue.

Bill

by **navydavesof** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:27 pm

carr wrote:Looking good, David! Your scratch building skills are getting better all the time. Well done.

Thanks. Focus is the key to progression.

carr wrote:I can't quite tell from the photo, are the upper sides of the hangar angled in like the Flt IIa's?

Yes, they are. The sides in the picture are actually the kit pieces that have a little 10' scale extension or "plug" in them. I wound up messing them up in the sanding process so they wound up all wavy. I recently cut them off and replaced them with sheet plastic. After having used that Plastructs glue that really, really bonds plastic, it was haaaard getting them apart. I will have to do a little modification to get the new sides to the proper angle, but that won't be tough.

If you want a glue that will really glue pieces together, Plastructs cement seems to be the stuff!

by **mabmanu** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 2:02 pm

Hello .

Very nice work ...

by **carr** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:38 am

Looking good, David! Your scratch building skills are getting better all the time. Well done.

I can't quite tell from the photo, are the upper sides of the hangar angled in like the Flt IIa's?

Can't wait to see more!

by **navydavesof** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 4:14 am

Here's a little update. It's been a while since any progress has been able to be made. Busy, busy!

Here is the arrangement of the aft Phalanx CIWS mount. Because the Mk110 57mm gun has been set where the CIWS platform was, the CIWS mount has bee moved aft and incorporated into the auxillery generator exhaust port shell.

Check it out! How much fun!

by **navydavesof** » Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:36 am

carr wrote:
navydavesof wrote:... I drew inspiration from the National Security Cutter.
Would that be the NSC that has the same armament as the LCS, stern ramp RHIB launch capability, longer range, X and S band radar, 3-D air search radar, SPQ-9B radar, AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare suite, CBR detection and defense, Seahawk series helo and UAV hangar?

lol.

Yes, that's the one!

by **carr** » Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:25 am

navydavesof wrote:... I drew inspiration from the National Security Cutter.

Would that be the NSC that has the same armament as the LCS, stern ramp RHIB launch capability, longer range, X and S band radar, 3-D air search radar, SPQ-9B radar, AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare suite, CBR detection and defense, Seahawk series helo and UAV hangar?

by **navydavesof** » Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:07 pm

Hi, Bill!

Bill Liebold wrote:This looks like it's coming along well. The mast is starting to look like the mast on the National Security Cutter.

Yes, sir, in the end I drew inspiration from the National Security Cutter. I am now understanding the framework behind mast construction.

Bill Liebold wrote:I do have a question about the harpoons. When one is launched, is there much blast damage done to the deck and the surrounding area?

The deck does suffer. Letting the blast go overboard is a very good idea, because you don't have to worry about cleaning things up, re non-skidding, repairing warped decking, etc. The criss-cross thing is a USN thing, and when I build the splinter shields around them and the onboard Harpoon installation cranes. I think it will be visually interesting for the model.

Bill Liebold wrote: Would the launcher that is behind the one being fired be affected? Does it really make a difference?

The launchers themselves and the tubes the missiles are in are shielded from the blast caused by the Harpoon launch.

by **Bill Liebold** » Wed Jun 15, 2011 7:35 am

This looks like it's coming along well. The mast is starting to look like the mast on the National Security Cutter. I do have a question about the harpoons. When one is launched, is there much blast damage done to the deck and the surrounding area? Would the launcher that is behind the one being fired be affected? I'm asking because I really don't know. On US ships the are arranged like there is no affect at all. On the Korean KDX III they are arranged so they fire outboard and there is the big blast deflector in the center of the launchers. On Spanish and Japanese Aegis ships the launchers are arranged so the blast goes overboard. Does it really make a difference?

Bill

by **navydavesof** » Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:57 am

Hi, guys!

After lots of deliberation and sketching on endless napkins and broken plastic...here is DDH's mast platform arrangement!

TRS-3D is up on top facing aft, SPQ-9B is forward on the mast, and the big platform further down is for SPS-49.

And here you can see the more refinded arrangement for the Harpoons, 8", VLS, a few of the radomes and such.

Good times, guys. Let me tell you, studying for qualification boards that are planned and planned and planned...but just never seem to come really hold things up! Constantly studying for a board level of knowledge is a bunch of BS. It's like cramming all of the time

PE on that mast is the next step!

by **carr** » Sun May 08, 2011 7:38 am

navydavesof wrote:... since the Navy has such a boner over everything "unmanned"...

Maybe if the Navy's procurement group were unmanned the various acquisition projects would be running smoother? The manned function sure isn't working!

by **carr** » Sun May 08, 2011 7:35 am

navydavesof wrote:... since the Navy has such a boner over everything "unmanned"....just had to include it.

Comm issues aside (and they are major issues!), my concern, as you know, was the tactical usefullness (or lack thereof). 'Nuff said.

carr wrote:... trying to maintain as much commonality with the Flight IIAs ... The Phalanx Block 1B aft and the Mk110 both provide sensor inputs to CIC so even if the mast is blown up ...

I get the commonality aspect and it's what the Navy would actually do so I can't object. Interesting point about the Phalanx and Mk110 providing alternate inputs. For the Mk110, I assume you're referring to EO/IR since the Mk110 does not have a dedicated radar of its own like the CIWS? What would you envision these alternate inputs being used for? They're such short range that they wouldn't be useful for SAMs. They could, potentially, provide short range fire control for the guns. Was that what you had in mind?

I know the Phalanx radar is part of the closed loop fire control for the CIWS. I was not aware that the radar could be "tapped into" for use as a general purpose input. If true, that's pretty neat!

by **navydavesof** » Sun May 08, 2011 3:27 am

carr wrote:It's a WIF so I can't argue with the inclusion of the UUWV and besides, it's a neat piece of technology even if it's only developmental at this point.

I know, it sucks. As we have discussed elsewhere the problems are inherent with the environment, but since the Navy has such a boner over everything "unmanned"....just had to include it.

carr wrote:Love the overall progress and execution. Nice job with the SPQ-9B and TRS-3D radars.

Thanks. I know you're twitching in objection over seeing all of the sensors on the same mast, but in trying to maintain as much commonality with the Flight IIAs and keeping costs down as far as possible I could not justify adding a second mast. HOWEVER you can rest assured that even if the mast is blown up CIC will still have active radar inputs. The Phalanx Block 1B aft and the Mk110 both provide sensor inputs to CIC so even if the mast is blown up, or is burned up with napalm like Seasick likes to theorize, the aft end of the ship is still providing pulse doppler fire-control radar inputs from two other sources into the brains of the ship. So, that makes me wonder....

�if the Mk160 GFCS can pair the forward gun with any of the sensors on the ship...can the Mk71 fire based on signal inputs from the Phalanxs and/or Mk110? Interesting thought!

carr wrote: Love the plug!

That's what she said!

You set me up on that one...

by **carr** » Sat May 07, 2011 8:51 pm

It's a WIF so I can't argue with the inclusion of the UUWV and besides, it's a neat piece of technology even if it's only developmental at this point.

Love the overall progress and execution. Nice job with the SPQ-9B and TRS-3D radars. Love the plug!

Can't wait to see more!

Regards,
Bob

The Ship Model Forum

New Generation DDH

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH

Re: New Generation DDH