The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:41 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 7:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 2:42 pm
Posts: 10
merriman wrote:

Working on Moebius to consider a line of 1/144 scale cold-war era sub kits. You ping on 'em too ... can only help.

David Douglass Merriman lll


That would be fantastic. I'm going there now to 'ping'!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 11:35 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:36 pm
Posts: 45
Just received my micromir 1/350 Skipjack kit.

She looks great. :thumbs_up_1: She's next up after Zumwalt.

_________________
In Drydock:

1/350 Skipjack (Mikromir)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2015 9:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Quote:
Just received my micromir 1/350 Skipjack kit.
She looks great.


It may *look* great in the box, but just be aware that the MicroMir Skipjack kit has a MAJOR ERROR. The indentations in the aft hull that indicate the locations for placement of the upper and lower rudders are totally wrong. If you assemble the kit and place the rudders in those areas the leading edge of the rudder will align with the leading edge of the stern planes, and the trailing edges will not align, since the rudders are not as long in the chord as the stern planes. In fact, it is the trailing edges of the rudders and stern planes that should align; the leading edges do not. The odd thing is that the kit drawings have it correct, but the kit itself has you placing the rudders in the wrong locations too far forward on the hull, if you use the indicated indented locations on the hull pieces. Easy to fix; fill in the shallow indentations for the rudders, drill a small hole in the correct location and in the rudder itself, and use brass wire to place and hold the rudder correctly in place.

At least you seem to have received a complete kit from MicroMir, my kit was missing the photo etch. Not too impressed with that fact, either.

See photo of a MicroMir kit below assembled with the rudders in the wrong locations, and the Moebius kit, with correct placement. Obvious once you see it. Also, I have put a Skipjack drawing below that illustrates the point:


Attachments:
File comment: Incorrect placement of rudder in assembled Micromir kit
Skipjack Micromir.jpg
Skipjack Micromir.jpg [ 96.52 KiB | Viewed 1031 times ]
File comment: Correct rudder placement in Moebius kit
Moebius Skipjack.jpg
Moebius Skipjack.jpg [ 129.67 KiB | Viewed 1031 times ]
File comment: Actual plan drawing illustrates the correct rudder placement relative to the stern planes. Most easily seen in upper drawing.
Skipjack plan.png
Skipjack plan.png [ 147.83 KiB | Viewed 1029 times ]

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Last edited by Tom Dougherty on Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:09 am, edited 3 times in total.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2015 9:12 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:36 pm
Posts: 45
Thanks Tom. Probably would have missed that.

_________________
In Drydock:

1/350 Skipjack (Mikromir)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:44 pm
Posts: 563
Location: Herk-de-Stad, Belgium
I missed it for sure! Thank you Tom, I will definitely correct my model on this.

_________________
"There are more planes in the ocean, than submarines in the sky" - old carrier sailor


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:38 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:36 pm
Posts: 45
What did you guys think of Ken Sewell's All Hands Down?

His theory is the Russians were responsible for the sinking of the USS Scorpion almost 50 years ago.

I wasn't crazy about it. Don't buy into Conspiracy theories.

_________________
In Drydock:

1/350 Skipjack (Mikromir)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
An analysis of the acoustics from the Azores hydrophone array by expert Bruce Rule (former US Naval officer in the acoustics area ) has totally eliminated the conspiracy theory aspect of Ken Sewells' Scorpion theory. The acoustic traces as well as the wreckage show no sign of a Soviet torpedo, instead a single low order explosive event (possibly a battery, due to both the state of the recovered battery material and the nature of the acoustic pulse) followed several minutes later by a much larger set of acoustic events, which most likely is the implosion of the hull at the frame where the aft cone junction was located in the Skipjack class. The initial low order event would have instantaneously incapacitated the crew (estimated, IIRC, to be equivalent of around 20 lbs of TNT) due to the overpressure in the enclosed hull space. The overpressure would be sufficient to render the crew unconscious and probably also had enough force to kill (50 PSI overpressure is uniformly fatal to humans). The submarine would have slowly drifted down and was estimated to have the weakest part, the cone junction, collapse forward into the machinery space at around 1500 ft depth. The supersonic water ram from this collapse is theorized to have blown out the operations compartment and sheared the bow off, which is consistent with the state of the wreckage as it is now. A key finding was that in the several minute interval between the first event and the event believed to be the hull collapse, there was no movement of the emitting source. Bruce published this all in a book (not widely distributed) and I wrote an article based on his research for the SubCommittee. Happy to send that to you if you would like.

Sewell has written two books. The first about the lost Soviet Golf II class K-129 was also a Sewell Conspiracy Theory book, postulating that the K-129 was only 350 miles from Hawaii when it sank, and was trying to emulate a Chinese submarine in launching a nuclear missile toward Hawaii to start a US-Sino war. He based this on a set of dives made by the Trieste II bathyscaphe at that site. It was revealed a few years ago that the Trieste II dive that he thought was on the K-129 wreck was actually a dive to recover a sunk film capsule from the first KH-9 satellite. It's on the CIA web site and can be downloaded. Called "An Underwater Ice Station Zebra". Sewell wanted to sell sensationalist books with the very thinest veneer of research and a heaping helping of speculation. Problem with "All Hands Down" is that the survivor families of the Scorpion are subjected to the idea that the last minutes of their sailors lives were spent in a life and death struggle to avoid a Russian torpedo. Instead it was a tragic accident almost certainly due to a technical issue with battery charging and ventilation, and the crew probably had no perception of it. They would have been rendered instantaneously unconscious by the initial event.

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:42 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:36 pm
Posts: 45
Thanks Tom. Actually I really disliked the book and gave it a 1 star review on Amazon.

Where exactly was the aft cone junction?

Would love to see your article, if that's ok.

_________________
In Drydock:

1/350 Skipjack (Mikromir)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Mike, email me at ascdr15@gmail.com.

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:08 pm
Posts: 110
Location: United States
In U.S. Submarines since 1945, Friedman claims that the Scorpion tested a reactor coolant scoop mounted forward of the sail (similar to those supposedly installed on the Narwhal's lower hull). Would anyone happen to have information about this scoop?

Jacob

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Unclear if it was a test for a scoop installation (fin) forward of the sail or if the system was actually installed. Apparently it exacerbated the snap roll problem on Scorpion, which was already an issue due to the existing large sail area. I can't imagine trying to pipe high pressure sea water from the area forward of the sail all the way back to the engineering spaces where the condensers are located.

BTW, an updated version of Friedman's "US Submarines since 1945" book is planned for 2018. It will include classes (Seawolf & Virginia) that were either not included or were in early development stages when the original was published.

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:08 pm
Posts: 110
Location: United States
I love Friedman's book (and am very excited there's going to be a second edition) but sometimes it seems he gets what was proposed for a particular submarine and how it was actually built confused. For example, he states that the Scorpion had a direct-drive turbine. This is very unlikely because she wasn't any larger than the other Skipjack and I have the Piping TAB (which covers all but the Skipjack) and the Scorpion does not appear to have any substantial changes in her propulsion machinery. I wonder if the prototype coolant scoop is the same.

Is there any evidence other than Friedman's book which shows that the Narwhal had coolant scoops?

Jacob

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Yes, Narwhal definitely had the coolant scoops for the S5G Natural circulation reactor, but as far as I know, it was a one off. With the SubSafe program the US Navy (unlike the Russians) decided against piping large volumes of high pressure sea water into the interior of a submarine. Narwhal also had a much larger direct drive turbine, which actually expanded due to heat (and was mounted to accommodate expansion) at high power. The interior layout was quite different from the other Sturgeon class subs. In other nuclear submarine classes, the seachest openings that duct seawater to cool the secondary loop condensate are kept as short runs.

To my knowledge, all of the Skipjack class had the same interior layout. The more I thought about it, the stranger it seemed to have a scoop forward of the sail and piping high pressure salt water all the way to the machinery area to cool the two primary loops. Where would you duct the piping thorough the various compartments? The snorkel air ducting problem from the sail was solved by running it through the small "hump" abaft the sail back to the engineering spaces. Later classes (Permit, Sturgeon & LA) solved the ducting problem by moving the diesel forward near the torpedo room.

I have one set of drawings (poorly reproduced) of the Skipjack class which shows the interior layout including the machinery and reactor spaces and layout. The reactor compartment shows the S5W with twin steam generators on either side of the reactor. The twin turbines, bull gear, thrust block and prop shaft and STG sets are also shown. Its one of a set of three very large sheets; I received these about 6 months ago.

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Last edited by Tom Dougherty on Tue Jan 09, 2018 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:02 pm
Posts: 33
Location: TX
Tom Dougherty wrote:
The initial low order event would have instantaneously incapacitated the crew (estimated, IIRC, to be equivalent of around 20 lbs of TNT) due to the overpressure in the enclosed hull space. The overpressure would be sufficient to render the crew unconscious and probably also had enough force to kill (50 PSI overpressure is uniformly fatal to humans).


Would that pressure have penetrated through all decks, bulkheads, and WT doors to reach every crewman in every compartment? Weren't the boats designed to resist similar pressure from seawater in case of a flooded compartment?

_________________
"I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way."
- Captain John Paul Jones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Quote:
Would that pressure have penetrated through all decks, bulkheads, and WT doors to reach every crewman in every compartment? Weren't the boats designed to resist similar pressure from seawater in case of a flooded compartment?


The overpressure from an internal explosion would have instantaneously raised the air pressure in all compartments (assuming the WT doors are all open, as per normal operation). In this case the hull would have acted to keep the internal increase in pressure high, as there would be no place for the pressure to dissipate. An explosive overpressure of just 50 PSI above ambient air pressure is sufficient to render humans unconscious and subsequently dead from internal organ injuries. Compare this to water pressure at 700 feet (Skipjack test depth), which would be around 300 PSI. The hull was designed to withstand this water pressure (and then some, as a safety factor).

The later classes of (such as Skipjack) SSNs have relatively few compartments vs. US WWII fleet submarines and flooding of one larger compartment in an SSN will probably sink the submarine, as reserve buoyancy figures & compartment numbers for modern US submarines are much less than those of WWII fleet boats.

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:02 pm
Posts: 33
Location: TX
Thank you, Tom. One other question intrigues me--in regard to the initiating event, the two near-simultaneous explosions, if one was the battery, what was the other, and which came first?

_________________
"I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way."
- Captain John Paul Jones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 424
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
The detailed explanation is best derived by reading Bruce Rule's commentaries.
Here's a link to the entire set of sections (4) of technical data assembled by Bruce Rule on the Scoprion loss;
http://coloradosubvets.org/bruce-rules-uss-scorpion-theory/

These include the helicorder traces from the LaPalma hydrophones. Note Section 3 is printed upside down, why, I don't know. You can easily invert it.

A followup on the battery issue from a nuclear qualified officer who served on the Skipjack class SSNs.
http://www.iusscaa.org/articles/brucerule/assessment_of_why_scorpion_was_lost_by_an_exceptionally_qualified_submarine_officer.htm


Finally, here's a link to an article I wrote a few years ago, based on Bruce's research:
http://www.bonefishbase.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2012_October_Periscope-Scorpion.pdf

_________________
Tom Dougherty
Researcher for: "Azorian: The Raising of the K-129" DVD
http://www.projectjennifer.at/
"Project Azorian: The CIA and the Raising of the K-129" Book
http://www.usni.org/store/catalog-fall-2012/project-azorian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:02 pm
Posts: 33
Location: TX
Very helpful, thanks much.

_________________
"I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way."
- Captain John Paul Jones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

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

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