The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:35 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1176 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 ... 59  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2021 4:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:53 am
Posts: 641
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Oh no, very sad news. I doubt there is anyone who is interested in naval history who has not read one or more books or articles by this distinguished naval historian.

_________________
Gernot Hassenpflug
Find out how it works, then functionality and limits


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2021 5:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 12138
Location: Ottawa, Canada
A true tragedy indeed - had the pleasure of having him as dinner keynote at a conference I chaired a few years back and seen him a couple more times on the conference circuit since. Such a jovial and spirited fellow, it's hard to imagine him gone.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 15, 2021 5:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:27 am
Posts: 822
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
This is sad news indeed in a time when so many have been taken from us too soon - whether from the pandemic or otherwise (don't know what caused his loss).

A documentary on the RN was not a documentary on the RN without his presence and passionate delivery of his commentary. I always enjoyed watching and listening to him and appreciated his insight.

May he rest in peace with fair skies and following seas.

_________________
Hard a starboard.......Shoot!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 16, 2021 8:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:50 pm
Posts: 338
Mr. Church wrote:
...Vanguard had been in reserve for four years by 1960, hard to see how wear and tear of the anchor rubbing strips could arise in that situation? She was towed from Devonport to Portsmouth in October 1956 and that was her only movement while in reserve to my knowledge. And she had been overhauled prior to being placed in reserve. Also there is far too clear a delineation between the brown and grey. Wear and tear would not be so perfectly confined to the raised anchor rubbing strip. It looks to be painted steel diamond chequer plate in the closeup view. Brown was probably a sensible colour as it would not excessively show rust.

It has got me wondering what colour the anchor rubbing strips were on Hood? It will be nigh impossible to tell brown and grey apart from black and white photography. And the fact that her forecastle was usually very wet will not help either. The colour could well have changed over time depending on individual refits etc. too.



Ah yes, the brown rubbing plates on Vanguard. That came up back when we were discussing the possibility of brown-painted areas aboard Hood (as far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on that one, but no point in me opening that back up until more information - for or against- can be found). Here's a screen cap I made at the time. I don't think I ever posted it though.

Attachment:
Vanguard.jpg
Vanguard.jpg [ 33.65 KiB | Viewed 1556 times ]

ABOVE- VANGUARD

As for HOOD, the sad truth is that we really don't know exactly what colour her rubbing plates were. We DO know the colour appears to have varied at times, but have operated under the assumption that, like other deck/hull fittings, they were hull colour or black (depending on the timeframe, etc.). The available colour footage is of no help nor is the wreck (some of the plate material is still roughly in place, but its impossible to determine an exact colour due to various factors).

_________________
Frank Allen
H.M.S. Hood Association
http://www.hmshood.org.uk
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 16, 2021 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:00 pm
Posts: 567
If the colour of Hood's anchor rubbing strips is known to be an unknown based on all information currently available then that at least is something useful to know. At the risk of sounding like Donald Rumsfeld.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
Question: am I alone in thinking that the shelterdeck companionways / inclined ladders leading aft from the forecastle deck to the shelterdeck on HOOD were folded inboard and stowed while at sea during the wartime years?

I attach several photos showing an obviously angled surface which I presume to be the underside of the companionway. Apologies for the rather crude collage.. the snip from 1937 photo at bottom obviously shows the ladder struck but with the platform still in place - I am just using it to illustrate what I am asking about..

Can anybody possibly advise? i.e.: have I lost the plot?


Attachments:
01deckcompanionwaystowedinboard.jpg
01deckcompanionwaystowedinboard.jpg [ 243.22 KiB | Viewed 1370 times ]

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2021 2:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2853
Both f'csle (2) and quarterdeck (4) stairs were stowed when sea.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2021 2:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
Hi EJ,

Yes I do realise this - it is just the manor of how the landing platforms associated with forecastle ladders were stowed.. They look to be hinged at the outboard edge of the shelterdeck and folded inboard to me.. hence the diagonal planar surface which is just visible in these photos.. but to memory I have never actually seen this represented on a model or drawing before.

Thanks for your reply!

Best,

Joseph

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2021 3:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2853
The ladder on the forecastle was initially fixed direction to the superstructure; later a small wooden grating platform was added that was folded upwards against the railing stanchions. For the quarterdeck ladders there were also a few wooden gratings that were taking out of their support frame and this is how I'll have them on my model (etched parts waiting to be applied)

Image

I also found this one (one!) image where the supports and gratings have been hinged upwards as well. But if I had to guess than normally the gratings were stowed with the ladders (like the gratings, unpainted wood).

Attachment:
038b.jpg


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 24, 2021 7:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
Hi EJ,

Thank you! Yes of course it makes sense that the wooden grates would have been folded inboard.. and that second photograph is very useful. I take it then that the gratings mounted above the forecastle deck were folded inboard the same way at the shelterdeck then whilst at sea..

The last question on my mind then (and probably an impossible one to answer) would be - were these gratings unshipped and stowed when the ship was cleared for action - or left in situ but folded as observed in the top photo I posted.. i.e.: was the hinging simply unlatched - or something more permanent..

I think that, when cleared for action, the shelterdeck stanchions lifelines, stormlines & hurricane lines (lol, or just , 'railings') would have been folded and stowed on deck in the same manor they were on the maindeck and forecastle deck.. which would suggest as much that the wooden grates had nothing to rest upon.. however the top photograph and inset which I copied in my original post seems to show the gratings resting further inboard anyway than the height of the stanchions..

I appreciate reading your sanity check.

Best regards,

Joseph

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 3:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2853
I intend to model my Hood with the forward gratings folded upwards, the outer-quarterdeck gratings removed and stored (bulkhead could be closed, see pics of Hood during construction), and the inner ones... perhaps folded up, haven't decided! Depends if the etched part fits :big_grin: Ladders: all stored. I can image it was easier to lower the ladder to the lower deck and move it inside, than hoisting it upwards and storing it there (more visually entertaining as that would be). I see no reason why there would be a difference in procedure when getting ready for action, and that includes the railing. During practise shoots the railing is not lowered either (rather risky to do at see considering the wetness of Hood's quarterdeck!).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:21 pm
Posts: 3374
Location: equidistant to everywhere
Is part of the reason railings are lowered and removed prior to action is to keep loose cables from snagging a gun or otherwise interfere with fighting if they are thrown about by blast and enemy shell hits?

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 3:56 pm 
Chuck,

The railings are not removed, the stanchions (the upright metal poles through which the wire rope guard rails are threaded) are hinged at the bottom. They are folded flat on "clearing away" prior to going into action for the reasons that you surmise. The guard rails are left on the deck. Mountings in navies of the World War 2 were configured so that the lower limit that a gun could fire was effectively the deck edge. This depended on the bearing of the target of course and was allowed for. You will appreciate that it was most important not to shoot one's own foot off! Naturally though, this did not prevent blast damage when a gun fired across a deck. That had to be accepted.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
chuck wrote:
Is part of the reason railings are lowered and removed prior to action is to keep loose cables from snagging a gun or otherwise interfere with fighting if they are thrown about by blast and enemy shell hits?


Chuck, concerning this practice I had always understood there to be several reasons at play - namely that anything left on deck lacking blast plating or sufficient support might be carried away and propelled into a missile or flying splinter.. which is the same reason why wooden ships in the age of sail would tow their boats behind/over the side when clearing for action (watch the opening scenes of Master & Commander).. such practices are still prescribed to this day whereby if it can burn, fly or splinter, or even float in a flooded compartment, then it probably should be struck and/or stowed when clearing ship for action. There is obviously also much to be said about the pressure and concussion resulting from a ship's own guns.. Further, it was probably best not to leave anything laying around that the crew might become tangled in if the worst were to happen.

Perhaps there is more to this that I am overlooking..

But, evidently, this is a detail which successive generations of maritime artists (this one included) and modelmakers have gotten wrong about representing ships when cleared for action. It is also not straightforward in that some navies, say the WW2 Kriegsmarine, appear to have folded their stanchions outboard as opposed to inboard, in some cases, in a manor resembling the flight deck netting of modern warships.. Victor Hayward (HMS TIGER at Bay) mentions having been asleep at his gun and missed the special sea dutymen striking the railings in the hours before his ship went into action at Jutland. So I think it would be important to remember that ships would only actually do this when they 'knew' they were going into action and actually had enough time to perform these evolutions - which obviously applies in the case of HMS HOOD at Denmark Strait (and is corroborated on wreckage photos anyway). Also, I understand that guard railing on the upper decks was permanent structure and usually not struck (where there may be a greater danger of falling from some control, searchlight or gun position etc) - but at exactly what deck level 0-? can be difficult to ascertain. I assume that the movable stanchions are just the ones supporting soft cable lifelines with visible screw tensioners etc. In the case of HMS HOOD for example, I am assuming that the shelter deck stanchions & railings were struck. When HMS HOOD was lost, Robert Tilburn abandoned ship from the shelterdeck - where he and two others were taking cover abaft the portside number 1 UP launcher and its associated splinter shielding. I may be wrong but I get the feeling he may have mentioned having to climb a railing to get off the ship, if a railing was actually there.. there were obviously other things he had to see and process, which were far worse than having to worry about climbing something as he was getting off the ship. Actually, respectfully, he mentioned having to run to the ship's side to be sick - and just ending up in the water as it came to him. His account is obviously still a very upsetting story to read. I may be wrong, but my wager is made on HOOD's shelterdeck railings.

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 5:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
EJFoeth wrote:
I intend to model my Hood with the forward gratings folded upwards, the outer-quarterdeck gratings removed and stored (bulkhead could be closed, see pics of Hood during construction), and the inner ones... perhaps folded up, haven't decided! Depends if the etched part fits :big_grin: Ladders: all stored. I can image it was easier to lower the ladder to the lower deck and move it inside, than hoisting it upwards and storing it there (more visually entertaining as that would be). I see no reason why there would be a difference in procedure when getting ready for action, and that includes the railing. During practise shoots the railing is not lowered either (rather risky to do at see considering the wetness of Hood's quarterdeck!).



Hi EJ, I am very glad to have had this conversation with you. I will agree that this seems about right for HOOD underway and going into action. I am familiar with your wonderful work and have followed your blog for many (okay many many, lol) years now. I actually have some of the turrets which you patterned which I have put on my own model of this ship. Have yet to replace the casted windshields on the gun commander's sight like you did but I will do that (yours look great). And - how annoying was it copying the outer-bottom plating detail and adding hull straking to this hull eh? I went all the way down to the outer-keel plates on my one.. because... I will literally never see it.... Thank you again for your replies!

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 28, 2021 2:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2853
It's been so long I cannot remember the start of the project :big_grin: Life happens I suppose and I suppose I underestimated how much work I was willing to put into the project! I have the feeling it's getting there, working towards painting the main superstructure parts... I do have to spend some time in one final beauty pass of the hull, replace the eyebrows and repair the plating. The hull was done a bit earlier with strips on the resin hull; a big mistake and many strips have detached themselves below the waterline. Should have started with my own hull and such, but that was in an earlier phase in my skill development . I have a great solution coming up and here is a hint:

Attachment:
Hood_27kts_Tecplot.png


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 28, 2021 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
haha very brave.. also a lot of very beautiful hull to bury or cut off.. are you 3D-printing this in clear resin? that would not be a method I have ever considered myself and I look forward to seeing what you can achieve with it. Maybe you will set a new paradigm.

Meanwhile the rest of us just make the stuff by hand.. I apologise that this is not the mighty HOOD, rather one of her smaller cousins.. I would only ever waterline in smaller scales like this - but all's fair and subjective in life. Sadly nothing is ever finished around here (so I guess I can relate). I am still slowly layering the spume onto the wake..


Attachments:
Roak_water.jpg
Roak_water.jpg [ 155.79 KiB | Viewed 1806 times ]

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2853
It will be burying the hull, just add a thick layer of foam or clay. No, no 3D printing, just some experimentation with the various techniques that float around the net. This image is a calculation of Hood's wave pattern, mainly to get the waterline and diverging wave pattern correct (semi important). Wave breaking can be estimated from this calculation, where the foam should start and such, but photographs do a better job if you want to model that. I actually collected quite a few images focusing on wave patterns only but never go around to writing down how it works and such... but this images do clearly show how the foam of a breaking wave is advected along the long and is 'stationary' on the water surface. A few minor issues to make it a bit more correct. Though I have to admit that many of the wave patterns that are modelled can look really convincing and this calculation is without an effects of seakeeping... so you'd have to add waves of the ocean + waves due to motion and such, so you can vary quite a lot in the pattern. This is one of the few exceptions where the sea is quite forgiving. :big_grin:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:41 am
Posts: 98
out of curiosity did you get the infamous trough in your result? i.e.: the one referenced by Drachinifel in that fairly recent podcast of his.. It seems that it was obviously observed in dimensional analysis i.e.: towtank testing because the RN based designs on such.. but I am curious to know if a similar result can be achieved with CFD?

On a separate note I might caution you on whatever you bury your hull into.. make sure it never deflects over time.. !

_________________
IG: @somewhere_east_of_suez
www.JosephReindler.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 2:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:51 pm
Posts: 2853
The calculation of the wave pattern had always been on my to-do list, but the Drachinifel video was a nice insensitive to actually get that subproject in motion. I contacted him and the 3D model used in the clip was initially used as a basis. Apparently it was easier to remodel the hull for the analysis (we developed our own plugins in Rhino for hull and propeller modelling and have several engineers who specialize in hull fairing, one of them remodelled the hull). The tool we used is an inviscid method and we have to take off the shaft lines and so on. Wave breaking and flow separation is not included, though you can calculate where wave breaking would occur; didn't check that for this result though. Generally speaking the wave elevation at the stern is overestimated a bit but the wave pattern overall can be very well captured and has been extensively validated.

Running a hull through a CFD code (that do take viscous effects into account) may lead to a pattern that looks plausible but may not in fact physical. That is, the result should work towards an accurate estimate of the wave resistance that we know from our towing tank tests and the many workshops on estimating wave resistance. Capturing the free surface is remains surprisingly difficult with these methods! You do see a shift towards these codes being able to capture much more of the physics but they have a longer lead time and are best run on our calculation cluster (240 cores . They also require that the hull and appendices are properly models and require a calculation grid that is well suited for the results that you are interested in. I was interested in an early estimate that would not demand many engineering hours for my hobby; the inviscid tool is perfect and runs quickly on my laptop.

I still have to fully post process send the results back to Drachinifel (and others) but I couldn't stand the sight of my work laptop so... delayed a bit :big_grin: But is the tough present? From the photograph used in the youtube movie it appears so, but there are more images in the series and the wave trough is not always visible there: there is an effect of seakeeping involved. Still

Attachment:
Hood_25kts_Rhino.jpg


When I take a close look at the wave pattern at around 25 knots there is indeed a small wave trough (need to look up actual speed during her final engagement). I took the draft at about 9.75m, and then the wave through is about 0.45m wrt the calm water surface. Can this significantly help to explain a hit below the armoured belt? Would the alleged shell trajectory and speed be impacted much if the water surface were a bit higher? I'll let other people discuss that subject... More post processing is in order though... this is early work but I think I can motivate myself to finish it :big_grin:

Of course, with these results I can also go to our seakeeping people and ask them nicely to run the hull through rough weather... and then execute a turn to port. And see what happens...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1176 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 ... 59  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 58 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