The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 1:03 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4761 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236 ... 239  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2022 3:09 pm 
Offline
Model Monkey
Model Monkey

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:27 pm
Posts: 3952
Location: USA
bigjimslade wrote:
...The great mystery for me is the shell and how to make allowances for that on the frames. Let's say the frames are laser cut out of plywood and the shell would be formed by wood strips. How much wood would there need to be? So how much would I need to offset the frames to accommodate the shell?

I have a book from NIP about building a large scale model of a RN battleship that is built plank on bulkhead. Yet the book leaves out the key subject of how much to offset the frames for the shell.

I asked in another forum for guidance and just got a run around. For me to do this kind of thing, I would need real guidance on how the shell should be created, how thick it would be, and how much I need to offset the frames.

I think I can help. Please bear with me, long answer follows based on a 1/192 scale plank-on-frame USS Missouri I built in 2002-2003.

Bottom line up front - just the opinion of one guy:
The sides of the frames were given a design offset of 3/16 inch. The top of the frames where the frames meet the main deck was given a design offset of 1/8 inch.

Be advised that the shell thickness question can't be easily answered by modelers because there are a lot of variables that have to be considered to build a plank on frame hull that is 55 inches long and 6 inches wide. So, it is best if you as the model designer decide the frame spacing and shell thickness and provide those dimensions to the modeler. Guidance on how to do that for a 1/192 scale Iowa hull follows.

Keep in mind that the size of the modeling market making large scale plank-on-frame models with access to specialized tools like a laser cutter and the skills necessary to use those tools is comparatively very, very small. Since those kinds of models are individually made by hand by modelers with very specific skills that were earned from the school of hard knocks, each modeler is likely to have a very different opinion as to frame spacing and shell thickness required in making a battleship hull 55 inches long and 6 inches wide. Their opinions will be dependent on a host of variables including the skillset of the modeler, the frame spacing chosen (and longitudinal bulkhead arrangement connecting the frames), and the materials and tools the modeler has available to him/her. One modeler might say, "make it 1/8 inch". Another will say, "make it 8 mm". Neither will be wrong, even though they are very different.

So here's one opinion based on a 1/192 scale Iowa model made using the plank-on-frame method. The model is now 20 years old and the hull is as strong today as it was when first built.

The hull of the 1/192 scale Missouri I built back in 2002-2003 has a structure composed of:
- 28 frames of 1/8 inch aircraft grade plywood commonly used in building R/C aircraft. The frames are shaped and spaced generally according to the drawing by Tom Walkowiak shown below.
- 3 longitudinal bulkheads (one centerline and two straddling the centerline bulkhead 2 inches away for hull stiffness). The longitudinals are also 1/8 inch aircraft grade plywood.
- The frame and bulkhead skeleton is sheathed in 1/8 inch balsa which was sanded to shape so slightly thinner than 1/8 inch in some places.
- The balsa sheathing is covered in fiberglass cloth and epoxy resin approximately 1/16 inch thick for strength and rigidity. Once fully hardened, the fiberglass became the outer hull shell, not the balsa. The balsa was only used to establish shape of the shell. The fiberglass resin was bead-filled with "micro balloons" to make the resin easily sandable for final shaping and to reduce weight.
- The fiberglass was sanded smooth then sprayed with automotive sandable gray primer from a rattle can. The thickness of the primer is negligible and can be ignored.
- Real hull shell raised plating strake detail was made by masking and spraying more layers of primer replicating the raised strakes. That thickness is also negligible.
- The main deck (structural deck) is 1/8 inch aircraft grade plywood. The deck is not covered with fiberglass or otherwise treated. The plywood main deck is overlaid with 0.40" thick grooved Evergreen polystyrene sheet simulating the real ship's deck planking.

So, the sides of the frames were given a design offset of 3/16 inch (1/8 inch for balsa skin + 1/16 inch for fiberglass covering). The top of the frames where the frames meet the main deck was given a design offset of 1/8 inch. The frames were cut with a jigsaw so there is some variation and error but this is corrected either by filling or sanding later.

English units were used because that is how the thickness of the plywood and balsa was measured, cut and sold.

The model is huge. Shown below is a photo of it dwarfing a 1/350 scale Tamiya Missouri in front of it.

Hope this helps.


Attachments:
1-192 BB-63 Larsen IM000778.jpg
1-192 BB-63 Larsen IM000778.jpg [ 578.44 KiB | Viewed 22348 times ]
350and192.jpg
350and192.jpg [ 405.48 KiB | Viewed 22348 times ]
BB61 hull plan (2).jpg
BB61 hull plan (2).jpg [ 119.88 KiB | Viewed 22348 times ]

_________________
Have fun, Monkey around.™

-Steve L.

Complete catalog: - https://www.model-monkey.com/
Follow Model Monkey® on Facebook: - https://www.facebook.com/modelmonkeybookandhobby
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2022 9:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:52 am
Posts: 157
Jim,

As I read it you are trying to find information as to how to draw/cut the frames to allow for the thickness of your proposed outer skin. With this will go the problem of bevelling the frames in the forward and after bodies to permit the close fitting of the skin as it runs into the stem and stern respectively, that will require some "work" if your frame bulkhead is of any thickness.

I have never attempted to build a plank on frame model but it does seem that the most widely available book on the subject: at least in the United Kingdom, is Harold A Underhill's "Plank on Frame Models and scale masting and rigging." This book was published in two volumes, you probably need only Volume 1 and it seems to be readily available on the second-hand book market. It may contain what you need. There is also an American book on the subject, that was written by someone called McCarthy (?).

The method seems to be more favoured by sailing craft model-makers, however, all should be well if the method is applied to a powered vessel unless there is pronounced bossing of the screw shafts. I've read of it still being achieved but in that case the hull was planked without taking into account the bossing: that is added on later using the protruding screw shaft and filling in the gap with a wooden fillet and fairing in the result with a filler.

I hope this helps.

81542


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2022 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 5003
The premier builder of successful plank on frame hulls on the site is Song, whose projects are in the scratch section are numerous. There are advantages to fiberglassing over a strip wood shell, my 1:192 Missouri is so built but my 1:120 APA and ARL are not, with still satisfactory results. The Missouri hull was originally built in 1965 and fiberglassed in the late 80's and is in excellent condition. Allowing for some assumed thickness will leave some minor inaccuracy, which could be checked with accurate templates if this was desired. I have had good results using very thin layers of Bondo over the Balsa, leaving a hard and durable surface. My 3D design program is still capable of doing 2D design and has a line offset feature where the templates for frame cutting can be offset exactly by the desired dimension.

The free design program I use id "Design Spark Mechanical". Very good for many things and not as good for some.

Good luck! Tom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2022 12:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2022 9:05 pm
Posts: 2
Hi All. I joined this Forum a few months back but this is my first post as I've been scouring through looking for USS Missour info. Earlier this year I bought the new Trumpeter 1/200 USS Missouri with the intention of building the 1986 configured ship as she was when in Sydney, Australia, for our 75th anniversary of the RAN. I was a CPO on HMAS Adelaide at the time & had the opportunity to get a quick visit to the Missouri. Since getting the kit I have searched everywhere for plans, 1/200 scale parts, etc to support modifying the Trumpeter kit but I am not having too much luck. I have bought parts from Model Monkey & Shapeways to support the conversion & have a significant number of photo's to work from but it would be nice to get some help/guidance from anyone who has done this before or can point me in the right direction. I wouldn't characterise myself as a skilled modeler but I can build from scratch to some extent & can work from plans.

I would most thankful for any assistance that can be provided.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2022 10:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:10 pm
Posts: 266
Location: Windsor Junction NS
Here are some links that might help, with samples from modelers on this site that have completed models of this class of ship.

Obviously, you'll need some imagery and schematics to establish the correct layout of the ship at that time - but it should be fairly straight forward with the Harpoons, Tomahawks, CIWS and such.

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm

http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm

_________________
ICBM Address: 44:78N 063:63W

Ex RCN, HMC Ships Gatineau, Athabaskan, Charlottetown, St. John's, Montreal, Charlottetown, Summerside, Montreal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2022 12:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2022 9:05 pm
Posts: 2
Thanks for the assist guys. Really appreciate the help.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2022 3:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:34 am
Posts: 116
Location: Hajdúszoboszló, Hungary
I've been asked some time ago to draw all 4 Iowas in their 1990's state. Hope these help:
USS Iowa:
Image
USS New Jersey:
Image
USS Missouri:
Image
USS Wisconsin:
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2022 3:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:34 am
Posts: 116
Location: Hajdúszoboszló, Hungary
DavidP wrote:
TZoli, what plans/drawings/photos did you use to do these? ABL 5 & 6 appear to be angled wrong as the inboard missile of both boxes would hit the superstructure if fired. I have the 1984 BOGP of the Iowa.


The drawings posted above eg the general plans as well as many photos as I could muster.

By ABL you mean the Tomahawk launchers? I don't see an issue as they always fired in an upward angle around 30-45 degrees?
https://youtu.be/8Eevs2IL7y8?t=31
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 2927
Location: Mocksville, NC
Tzoli,

Very nice renderings of the modernized IOWAs. Thanks for posting!! You are correct about the ABL launchers - at the angle of launching, the missiles won't hit the deck house.

Ianmc,

Ambitious project - I modified the Trumpeter 1:200 scale MISSOURI to work for my USS NEW JERSEY (1968-69) configuration. I have a gallery entry of her in the Model Warships Gallery (http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... /index.htm). Did a lot of hull modifications as the kit hull is incorrect. But, that's another story - I served in her in 1968-69 so I have closer ties than the typical modeler. Just keep in mind that all 4 IOWAs are DIFFERENT - esp. NEW JERSEY. And their 1980s modernizations are equally different. Subtle, but different.

Hope this helps,

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144, Various Lg Scale FC Directors
Finished:
USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) 67-69 1:200
USN Sloop/Ship PEACOCK (1813) 1:48
ROYAL CAROLINE (1748) 1:47
AVS (1768) 1:48


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2022 4:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:34 am
Posts: 116
Location: Hajdúszoboszló, Hungary
I have drawings of other versions of the Iowas but those are never-were:

Iowa Class (Illinois and Kentucky) King-Nimitz Redesign from 1945
Kentucky BBAA Conversion (3 variants) from 1948
Iowa Class BBG Conversion (The Two Talos / Terrier / Tartar version) from 1955 (I've chosen Talos)
Kentucky BBG Conversion (The SPS-32/33 variant) from 1956
Iowa Class BBG Single Ended Conversion (Both Regulus and Polaris variant) from 1958/59
Iowa Class BBG Double Ended Conversion (Both Regulus and Polaris variant) from 1958/59
Iowa Class Commando Ship Conversion from 1962
Iowa Class Phase II Scheme 1 VSTOL (The BBV variant with ski jump aft and Harriers, the Martin Marietta proposal) from 1983


Last edited by TZoli on Thu Jan 12, 2023 4:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2022 2:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 5003
Indeed few ships are the same as their sisters, more so as time goes on. Whitehurst DE 634 became quite different than her famous sister England DE 635, Watts DD 567 from her sister Stoddard DD 566. I converted my 1:192 Missouri some time ago to her present configuration. This helped that I was able to make a number of visits to her at Pearl Harbor and take hundreds of photos, though too many areas remained inaccessible in the upper works.

Yes the armored box launchers are not totally obvious till one sees them open and raise for the launch sequence. On my model they are all closed and locked, though making one in a firing position would be an interesting project. I did spend time on Missouri in her reserve fleet days, but then I didn't own a camera and couldn't have taken photos anyway, National Secrets ya know.

Cheers: Tom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 448
By count, there are 154 (or 155) openings in the shell below the waterline.
Attachment:
Screen Shot 2022-12-19 at 10.57.46 PM.jpg
Screen Shot 2022-12-19 at 10.57.46 PM.jpg [ 272.11 KiB | Viewed 21751 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2022 2:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 5003
For counting that many openings I would have to invite all of my friends to a shoeless beach party! Doing correct hull plating would be a reasonably good accomplishment! For my DE, currently hull openings are a mystery...

Be a fun project!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2023 10:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:27 pm
Posts: 43
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba; Canada
Fliger747 wrote:
For counting that many openings I would have to invite all of my friends to a shoeless beach party! Doing correct hull plating would be a reasonably good accomplishment! For my DE, currently hull openings are a mystery...

Be a fun project!



This is precisely the quest that I'm on.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2023 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 448
The final answer is 155. There was one we were not sure of but I was able to identify where it should be. Shore-nuff, it was there.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2023 7:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:27 pm
Posts: 43
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba; Canada
bigjimslade wrote:
The final answer is 155. There was one we were not sure of but I was able to identify where it should be. Shore-nuff, it was there.

Did I skim-over it, of maybe I've forgotten, but how many 'discharges' are there ABOVE the waterline?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 448
Sean_the_Nailer wrote:
bigjimslade wrote:
The final answer is 155. There was one we were not sure of but I was able to identify where it should be. Shore-nuff, it was there.

Did I skim-over it, of maybe I've forgotten, but how many 'discharges' are there ABOVE the waterline?


I haven't yet counted them yet but I believe it is fewer than 20.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2023 10:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 448
For my first large attempt, I printed one of the three ABL configurations on USS New Jersey in 1:48.
Attachment:
IMG_7325.jpg
IMG_7325.jpg [ 243.82 KiB | Viewed 33898 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 5003
What is it?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 448
bigjimslade wrote:
The final answer is 154. There was one we were not sure of but I was able to identify where it should be. Shore-nuff, it was there.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4761 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236 ... 239  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 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