The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Jun 30, 2025 12:40 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 975 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 49  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:08 pm
Posts: 942
About Spencer Miller John: could well be. 2 pulleys visible under search light platform could have been stored there when not in use with Spencer Miller. But it leaves one question: in the photo this system cables connected main mast of one ship with foremast of another so, if those details were associated with Spencer Miller, shouldn't they be also visible on the foremast?

_________________
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:38 am
Posts: 99
Location: Moscow, Russia
cerberusjf wrote:
“1” looks correct to me too. Hopefully Andrew will agree too.

Yes, certainly.
It is difficult to argue with a photo. :smallsmile:

cerberusjf wrote:
On a different topic, I noticed some unusual triangles on the starboard side of OREL’s mainmast, which seem to be present on BORODINO too. I wonder if they to do with the Spencer Millar coaling system?

John, bravo! :thumbs_up_1:
As always, you are absolutely right!
These are details (pulleys) of Spencer Millar coaling system.
Image

cerberusjf wrote:
...were the scuttles round with respect to the hull frames or to the vertical?

The case (frame) of a scuttle fastened (on screws) to sheets of an external covering.
Therefore, the angle of scuttle`s slope always was the same, as an angle of slope of a board of the ship. :smallsmile:
It`s the "Aleksandr III"`s scuttles:
Image

DariusP wrote:
About Spencer Miller:... if those details were associated with Spencer Miller, shouldn't they be also visible on the foremast?

I believe, because the S-M system has not been intended for coal loading from the fighting ship to the fighting ship - only from the coal transport going behind (on a tow).
In a photo we see experimental, non-usual use of system, IMHO. :smallsmile:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:08 pm
Posts: 942
Thanks for the drawing Kronma. As always, you come up with treasures :)
KRONMA wrote:
I believe, because the S-M system has not been intended for coal loading from the fighting ship to the fighting ship - only from the coal transport going behind (on a tow).
In a photo we see experimental, non-usual use of system, IMHO. :smallsmile:

Sounds good to me :thumbs_up_1: Especially that winches associated with S-M system were all located aft.

And just to clarify: there were 3 S-M fittings on the main mast?
Image

_________________
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 3:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:38 am
Posts: 99
Location: Moscow, Russia
DariusP wrote:
Especially that winches associated with S-M system were all located aft.

Not all...
Two more winches were on the sparedeck. :smallsmile:
Besides, both winches which are drawn in the Album, are in marching position, not in the position for use.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:39 pm 
Thanks Andrew, all is clear :smallsmile: Also my apologies, it is SPENCER MILLER (MILLAR is a spelling common in my part of the world)


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:08 pm
Posts: 942
Can't for the life of me find this information now but I am almost sure that I have read somewhere that Spencer-Miller system was taken off either Orel or Borodino and installed on another ship (Imp. Nikolay I ?)...

_________________
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:39 pm 
I was looking at the photos again, and I think I noticed something else. I think the compass on the middle platform is not where it is own on the plans. The compass ( + ) is shown as outboard of the ladder ( = ) and outboard of the middle bridge support ( + ).
Attachment:
1.JPG

Looking at the photos, it appears to be inboard of both of these. I think it is almost next to the inboard side of the ladder. I think it is around the location marked ( x ).

Attachment:
photo1.JPG

Attachment:
photo2.JPG

But this does not match the plan above, or this plan.
Attachment:
bridges_smll.JPG

So, what was the true shape of the middle bridge?
Also, I think there is a rangefinder pillar on the outboard end of the middle bridge. I have not seen a rangefinder in this location on OREL.
Attachment:
rangefinder_question.JPG


Last edited by cerberusjf on Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:08 pm
Posts: 942
I don't think that moving compass to a different location would have to have an effect on middle bridge's shape. Shape of the bridge and position of compasses on the drawings was what designers thought as a good idea. Practice could have showed a necessity of relocating compasses which wouldn't be a major operation. On the other hand, changing shape of the middle bridge to accommodate new locations, would be. And I don't think there was a time for that. Just an opinion of course.

_________________
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:06 pm 
DariusP wrote:
I don't think that moving compass to a different location would have to have an effect on middle bridge's shape.

Moving the compass would not be a major operation and changing the shape would not be necessary as long as the crew could get past the compass without difficulty. The reason for the bridge being wider where the compass was located on the plans was I think to allow the crew to pass.

Either way, the compass is in a different location from the plans.

Any luck remembering the source of your information on the S-M?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:08 pm
Posts: 942
cerberusjf wrote:
Moving the compass would not be a major operation and changing the shape would not be necessary as long as the crew could get past the compass without difficulty.

Touché :)

cerberusjf wrote:
Any luck remembering the source of your information on the S-M?

Did have busy couple of days. Will start seriously looking for this info asap. Just remember, I have said "almost sure".

_________________
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:39 am 
DariusP wrote:
Touché :)


I hope we don't have to have a duel :-)

I have had another look at the middle bridge and think that I may have found the discrepancy in the position of the compass with respect to the ladder. I think the ladder is not shown in the correct position on the plan. This is because in the photo, the middle of the bridge support ( + ) is in line with the outboard stanchion on the ladder ( = ). I marked the line of sight on the photo in orange. It can be seen that the ladder has been drawn in a different position.
Attachment:
bridges_smll_line_of_sight.JPG

Attachment:
photo2a.JPG

Moving the ladder nearer to where I think it should be, the position of the compass with respect to the ladder becomes much closer to what is seen in photographs.
Attachment:
bridges_smll_ladder_moved.JPG

Therefore, I think that this must be closer to the true configuration.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Slava question
PostPosted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:07 pm 
I have an attractive color plan & profile drawing of Slava during WWI. I would like to do a model of the ship in this guise, but am at a loss as to the shape of the deck houses (plan view). Can anyone shed any light on this question?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:54 am 
Hi,
which deck houses were you thinking of? I have very little information on Slava, but may be able to help.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:37 am 
Cerberusjf: Thanks for offering to see if you can help. The drawing I have has forward and aft upper deck platforms that obscure the shape of the underlying structures below the bridge & what was previously the after bridge.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 6:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:38 am
Posts: 99
Location: Moscow, Russia
G. Shoda
Probably, this drawing will be useful. :smallsmile:
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:53 pm 
Kronma:

Thanks a lot for your assistance. The drawing should be very helpful in determining the shapes of the deck houses I was unsure of. I am in the last stages of completing a model of the French predreadnought Charlemagne but am very excited about moving on to the next model, which now will surely be Slava. Thanks again.

Regards,

G. Shoda


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 20, 2010 11:14 pm 
Image


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:08 pm
Posts: 942
Nice work able :thumbs_up_1:

_________________
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:13 am 
Pustotnik wrote:
a mast is displaced on the back on 80 sm, the construction of building on and centers of rotation differ from showed on this draft
Image
Image
I think so

Hi Pustotnik,
the mast on the draft of "BORODINO" is I think on frame 72, the mast on "OREL" in her draft is on frame 71, so "BORODINO's" mast is 1.2 m aft of "OREL's" on the drafts. If "BORODINO's" mast is a further 0.8m aft, then it would be 2m aft of "OREL's" mast. Is that correct? May I ask where this information comes from please? Can I ask why this was done?
Thanks.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 3:11 am
Posts: 1
Hello there shipwrights,
I have started my first ship model - the Zvezda 'Orel'.
Would like to depict it enroute to Tsushima.
I'm unable to see if they carried the torpedo nets slung along the hull on this journey. Can anyone enlighten me?
What is the best way to model the nets? Shoelace??
Many thanks.
Ken


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 975 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 49  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group