The Ship Model Forum

Learning how to scratch build model allows us to recreate any ship we find interesting. BTW
since you -and I- also like slender cruisers, check this class out.
http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/004/04004.htm

[quote="PICKETBOAT"]GazzaS


[color=#800000]" But I guess that is one of the joys of trying to build the forgotten, the unique, the obsolete, the old, and the antique."[/color]

With out a doubt these are the ones to build and create the biggest and best challenges, as you are finding out. Is it possible to check hull lines or photos of contemporary cruisers? These might give you a clue regarding the squirrel cheeks (great expression). I have never come across anything like this on WW1 destroyers which were equally long and slim.
Having made this sort of mistake myself, is it possible that one bulkhead/profile is not located at just the right point along the keel. I came across this in some plans and when I started to assemble the hull it created a strange midship bulge. I removed the offending bulkhead and tried re positioning it slightly forward or aft until a temporary curved metal strip positioned on each beam lined it all up (minus the bulge).
It might be that you have galloped ahead of this point in which case sanding and filling might achieve the same result.
Some old hand-drawn plans are miles out by the way, and it is sometimes a good idea to throw together a mock up using cereal packet cut outs and a hot glue gun. Amazingly old technology I know but it can help.
Good luck.
What vessel is it anyway? I'm intrigued.[/quote]

The ship in question is the minelaying light cruiser SMS Brummer. Commissioned in 1916 and scuttled in Scapa Flow where she remains to this day. The unsightly bulges occur at the forecastle break. So, sliding is out of the question. I filed and sanded the plug down to an acceptable shape, but then found the mdf I'd used less than ideal because the fine edges weren't strong enough for the rigours of metal shaping.

Then summer heat and humidity put a stop to serious model building. I need to fabricate a new plug. I'm hoping knot less pine will suffice because real hard woods take forever to shape.

When I wanted to build a model of the IJN Tone I could not at the time find any decent plans, that is any that agreed with another on major points like LOA, beam, as for lesser details, they varied widely and for the same period!,But I did find a bunch of good photos of the ship. One was dead-abeam port side. I was thus able to calculate [i]fairly [/i]accurately -using the known dimensions of her one of main gun turrets. It was a PIA but the plans came out quite well. Whereas, I had them copyrighted, I can give them to or post them anywhere. Kits are nice and many are a lot better than those offered in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, still, to scratch something not available is....

True enough, also the older the ship, the more difficult it becomes to find a decent plan and even if you find it, it's more likely to be less accurate than the more recent drawings.
So I guess the man who drew the lines used perhaps only pictures as a reference or did exactly the same as you? Built a model, made it look right and cut it up to get a decent set of line drawings. This was done in the past as well to build real ships. In that case however, if he didn't cut at exactly the right spot, or put his frame position not at the right spot it could create what you are experiencing. This also assumes his model really looked right (to him...), so a lot of uncertainties.
I agree with all above, if you do not have any pictorial evidence of the real shape and it doesn't look right, it's probably better to make it look right than to stick to the drawings.
I also do what Picketboat mentions, if I'm not sure, or my frame shapes are based on obscure data, I make a test model in a smaller scale of cardboard and paper strips, it will show the main issues if there are any. Any other method is good as well, but the main point is that you get a relatively fast, cheap, yet decent idea of the hull shape from the drawings this way.
Hope to see some progress on that ship over here, I'm curious as well!

GazzaS


[color=#800000]" But I guess that is one of the joys of trying to build the forgotten, the unique, the obsolete, the old, and the antique."[/color]

With out a doubt these are the ones to build and create the biggest and best challenges, as you are finding out. Is it possible to check hull lines or photos of contemporary cruisers? These might give you a clue regarding the squirrel cheeks (great expression). I have never come across anything like this on WW1 destroyers which were equally long and slim.
Having made this sort of mistake myself, is it possible that one bulkhead/profile is not located at just the right point along the keel. I came across this in some plans and when I started to assemble the hull it created a strange midship bulge. I removed the offending bulkhead and tried re positioning it slightly forward or aft until a temporary curved metal strip positioned on each beam lined it all up (minus the bulge).
It might be that you have galloped ahead of this point in which case sanding and filling might achieve the same result.
Some old hand-drawn plans are miles out by the way, and it is sometimes a good idea to throw together a mock up using cereal packet cut outs and a hot glue gun. Amazingly old technology I know but it can help.
Good luck.
What vessel is it anyway? I'm intrigued.

[quote="EJFoeth"]It's quite typical; whenever you combine several views (lines drawings or front/left/top) you'll find small (to very large) errors in hand work. Making a good lines drawing by hand takes considerable skill (I had to do it once as a student and the result was rotten :big_grin: ). Fortunately we now have 3D CAD...[/quote]

But you still have to wonder about the source used by the drawer of the plans. The plans themselves were received in six different scales. So, I have to resize the plans I am using, whilst the others provide some visual reference...or not.

At best I will be able to say is that this is [u]my[/u] model of ship-X. I won't be able to call it a perfect model of ship-X. Which kinda sucks...

But I guess that is one of the joys of trying to build the forgotten, the unique, the obsolete, the old, and the antique.

It's quite typical; whenever you combine several views (lines drawings or front/left/top) you'll find small (to very large) errors in hand work. Making a good lines drawing by hand takes considerable skill (I had to do it once as a student and the result was rotten :big_grin: ). Fortunately we now have 3D CAD...

I've brought the hull shape to her expected sleekness. However, since I have strayed from the drawing, I feel as if I have created an 'artist's impression' of the ship. Oh, well.

Sleek lines for a sleek cruiser certainly does sound way better and way more plausible then squirrel cheeks.
Though I must admit I do not have any knowledge of cruisers from that era, but from my knowledge of shipdesign is does sound way more plausible to have sleek lines.

Greetings Josse

So, I'm building a WWI light cruiser. The hull is long and sleek, with her beam being less than 1/10th her length. She has a raised foc'sle which is a bit less than a third of her entire length. Pictures are rare, yet you have some great looking plans, contour lines included for 28 different places along the hull. All appears great so far.

The gentleman who made your drawings took the time to draw various cross sections of the ship, even numbering them. Fantastic for sure. However, their usefulness becomes dubious when none of the cross-sections match any numbers on the dorsal or side views. Ok...not dubious. Useless.

Back to those lovely and plausible contour lines. You've made your ribs and are looking forward to seeing that sleek hull laid out in 3-d. But, she seems a little blocky at the forecastle break and below the waterline. You lay some planks, or whatever method you're using. Maybe you're making a form to be molded. Whatever the case, your ship has cheeks like a squirrel preparing for a long winter.

My simple question is: Lacking further evidence to either promote or oppose those squirrel cheeks, do you use them, or do you sand them sway until sleekness returns?

Thank you for reading.