The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:57 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4338 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Mar 15, 2020 1:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 1738
Location: Mocksville, NC
Jim,

Regarding your plan for the asbestos bridge/conning tower level deck mats:

Thanks for posting! Very interesting. One note - they are WWII era only, as the bridges were added/modified after this drawing was published. I couldn't find any dates due to the low res. of the picture, but I doubt any of this applied post-war. We certainly never had any in the late 1960s. My guess as towards color would be a med/dark brown or possibly deck gray/black.

Hope this helps,

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) Late '40 1:200
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144
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: Sun Mar 15, 2020 9:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
The date on the plan is 11-16-42. Unfortunately, I cannot post here at a high enough resolution to read it. It's after the design for the Missouri and Wisconsin but before the New Jersey and Iowa were updated.

It would be great to know what color these were.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 12:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2379
Is there any evidence these were used on the Iowa's or any other capital ship?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 8:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 1738
Location: Mocksville, NC
Jim,

Thanks for sending me the .tif file - I am still unable to make out some of the very small text and did not see any material descriptions other than asbestos. I also did not find any color or descriptions of painting instructions, etc. although that could be there (just illegible). The date is 11/16/42 and various details on the drawing indicate which of the ships that particular detail refers to.

Hank

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) Late '40 1:200
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144
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: Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
BB62vet wrote:
I am still unable to make out some of the very small text and did not see any material descriptions other than asbestos.


Sadly, the person doing the microfilming was high on LDS at the time.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 2681
LDS?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2379
It's a popular church group in Utah.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2020 8:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:41 pm
Posts: 1738
Location: Mocksville, NC
:doh_1:

_________________
HMS III
Mocksville, NC
BB62 vet 68-69

Builder's yard:
USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) Late '40 1:200
USS STODDARD (DD-566) 66-68 1:144
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: Tue Mar 17, 2020 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
DavidP wrote:
LDS?


You folks need to watch more Star Trek!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgHxFNFWlZc


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2020 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:12 pm
Posts: 2681
seen all episodes & movies numbers of time. I kind of figured it was LSD but was not certain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:21 pm
Posts: 3213
Location: equidistant to everywhere
Load Duration Curve

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2020 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
On the Iowa and NJ, the bottom edge of the boot topping sloped up towards the stern so that it was 6' 11-1/2" thick at the bow and 29-1/2" at the stern.

On the Missouri and Wisconsin the boot topping was 41-1/2" wide the entire length.

The painting instructions suggest that the Missouri and Wisconsin sat around 20" deeper than the Iowa and New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2020 2:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:21 pm
Posts: 3213
Location: equidistant to everywhere
bigjimslade wrote:
On the Iowa and NJ, the bottom edge of the boot topping sloped up towards the stern so that it was 6' 11-1/2" thick at the bow and 29-1/2" at the stern.

On the Missouri and Wisconsin the boot topping was 41-1/2" wide the entire length.

The painting instructions suggest that the Missouri and Wisconsin sat around 20" deeper than the Iowa and New Jersey.



Was the difference in boot topping width present during WWII?

Back of nevelope calculation suggest 20" of added imersion would correspond to 3000 tons of added displacement. were Wisconsin and Missouri 3000 tons heavier?

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2020 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
chuck wrote:
Was the difference in boot topping width present during WWII?

Back of nevelope calculation suggest 20" of added imersion would correspond to 3000 tons of added displacement. were Wisconsin and Missouri 3000 tons heavier?


Those boot topping figures are from an 8/18/41 painting plan with the latest update 6/8/44. The MO/WI directions were added 7/28/43.

There was more armor on the last four Iowa class battleships than on the first two because the Washington and London Treaties were dead when it came time to order their armor.

The transverse armor on the Iowa and New Jersey was 11.3" and 14-1/2" on the Missouri and Wisconsin. The splinter deck and gun tubs were 5/8" on the IA/NJ and 3/4" on the MO/WI.

I calculate the transverse armor is about 6800 ft-sq. x 3.2 x 40 lbs/sq-ft that gives 435 tons.
The splinter deck is about 22,614 ft-sq x 5 lbs/sq-ft = 56 tons.

I don't think that is coming close to 3000 tons. It might have come from somewhere else.

Attachment:
Boot.jpg
Boot.jpg [ 81.06 KiB | Viewed 1037 times ]


Not that the bottom of the boot topping on the last four ships is at the same level as the waterline of the IA/NJ (which is slightly higher than the designed waterline).

BTW: I am trying to post the things that I find that appear to be of the most use to modelers. I can only post a small subset of what I uncover just due to volume and I am hampered by the 1200 maximum pixel width here. If you have any requests, let me know and I will try to accommodate.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
Here is an atypical example of the type of joint that occurs frequently in the Iowa class.

My red line marks the start of the shaft casting. The plating is welded flush to the casting. Forward of the casting is the one-plate D2 strake. Below that are the D and C1 strakes. The D1 strake has a riveted, overlap joint with the strakes below. But then its lower aft corner needs to be flush. The underlap has to be shaved down to allow this. That's a lot of machining for a joint that provides zero benefit. The Kentucky and Illinois were welded flush here.

The typical example of this joint occurs on the bottom at places where strakes divided to create T-shaped joints. Where B overlaps A at the side but is flush with A at the end you get the same kind of corner problem.

|A
A |-------
|B



Attachment:
Plating.jpg
Plating.jpg [ 33.09 KiB | Viewed 944 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:21 pm
Posts: 3213
Location: equidistant to everywhere
The anti-corrosion anodes seem to be cut only roughly to similar sizes and then riveted with no more than a nod to careful alignment.

The part of the aft hull illustrated seems to contain complex curves, where the same plate is convex along one direction and concave in the perpendicular direction. Also there are radical changes to radius of curvature over a short distance. I think it would be difficult to align pre-drill the plates with rivet holes without computer modeling. The machining the excess might be necessary anyway just to make sure all plates along the seams meet.

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
This illustrates the moulded lines of that area. It is laid out a a series of three interlocking arcs.

The aft part of the bossing is part of a large casting. The forward part of the bossing would have to have been shaped. It is 3/4" thick so that would have been no easy task.

Attachment:
Shaft Bossing.jpg
Shaft Bossing.jpg [ 66.46 KiB | Viewed 837 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:27 pm
Posts: 19
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba; Canada
BigJimSlade,
That picture/drawing above, is that perspective from 'inside' the trough/centerline of the hull? Or is it from outside, under the gunnel's? It would seem to me (comparing with my Tamiya 1:350 model) that it is from outside, but that does not mean the model is correct/accurate.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:15 am
Posts: 2379
The outboard screw is in the photo foreground, although somewhat out of focus.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2020 1:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:07 pm
Posts: 335
Sean_the_Nailer wrote:
BigJimSlade,
That picture/drawing above, is that perspective from 'inside' the trough/centerline of the hull? Or is it from outside, under the gunnel's? It would seem to me (comparing with my Tamiya 1:350 model) that it is from outside, but that does not mean the model is correct/accurate.



That is the outside of the starboard twin keel looking aft. I hope you are not being confused by the AOTS book that shows bossing on the inside (tunnel side) of the keel where these is none. The tunnel side is flat.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4338 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Brad Newland and 14 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