The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Oct 19, 2020 10:47 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 110 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2020 5:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:48 pm
Posts: 47
G'day again,

I am getting to the paointing stage for my USS Kamehameha (BF Class) and I have doubts about the painting guide in the Mikro Mir instructions. The red oxide demarcation is depicted as halfway up the hull sides and level with the aft horizontal dive planes, but images in this thread show that the red oxide was extended higher up the hull sides, basically level with the top of the bottom section of the upper rudder if that makes sense?

Secondly, what colour should the screw be? I am thinking a goldish colour but short of brass

cheers,

Pappy


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2020 6:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:44 pm
Posts: 976
Location: Herk-de-Stad, Belgium
Pappy wrote:
G'day again,

I am getting to the paointing stage for my USS Kamehameha (BF Class) and I have doubts about the painting guide in the Mikro Mir instructions. The red oxide demarcation is depicted as halfway up the hull sides and level with the aft horizontal dive planes, but images in this thread show that the red oxide was extended higher up the hull sides, basically level with the top of the bottom section of the upper rudder if that makes sense?

Secondly, what colour should the screw be? I am thinking a goldish colour but short of brass

cheers,

Pappy

Hi Pappy,

Maybe take good look at the previous post of Vepr: note that the waterline is at the 29 ft mark on the vertical rudder. That's the top of the boot topping or the dark grey band. The boot topping itself is six feet high at most, so the top of the anti fouling (what you like to call oxide red which it isn't) is at the 23 feet mark on the rudder. That's still above the end plates on the dive planes.
Next thing: take another close look at the water line: it's not parallel to the axis of the cylindrical hull, but running lower to the right of the image. Meaning: the hull is not horizontal in the water, but lying deeper at the stern then at the bow. So to be accurate you have to look also at bow pictures, and note that the waterline lies lower on the hull sides then at the stern!

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2020 9:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:08 pm
Posts: 197
Location: United States
Pappy wrote:
G'day again,

I am getting to the paointing stage for my USS Kamehameha (BF Class) and I have doubts about the painting guide in the Mikro Mir instructions. The red oxide demarcation is depicted as halfway up the hull sides and level with the aft horizontal dive planes, but images in this thread show that the red oxide was extended higher up the hull sides, basically level with the top of the bottom section of the upper rudder if that makes sense?

Secondly, what colour should the screw be? I am thinking a goldish colour but short of brass

cheers,

Pappy


It depends how you want to depict the submarine. If you want to depict her in active service, the red antifouling paint goes halfway up the side, level with the main axis of the hull (thus level with the stern stabilizers/planes), like you described. Red paint only extended up to the waterline when the submarine was launched (some subs were launched this way, some weren't). Sometimes after an overhaul, the area between the waterline and the red paint on the lower half of the hull was painted with a mixture of black and red antifouling paint, which is sort of a dark maroon. See this photo of the Barbel:

http://navsource.org/archives/08/580/0858009.jpg

But if you're going to be depicting her in active service, the bottom half should be red and the top half should be black. I also like to make the areas on the bow where there are an acoustic windows for sonar a lighter shade than the main hull colors, but that's up to your personal preference.

As for the propeller, it was made of manganese bronze, which tarnishes to a dull yellowy-orange metallic color. But if it's fresh a brass or gold-colored paint would do just fine.

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


Last edited by Timmy C on Sun Jun 28, 2020 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
[img] tags removed as Navsource doesn't enable hotlinking


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2020 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:48 pm
Posts: 47
G'dsy Maartin and Justin,

Thanks very much for the great info. I am definitely going for an in service look and will be using the demarcation as suggested by Justin but i like the idea of a purple-ish boot topping. Incidentally, what would you reccomend for the red colur, it is a little closer to orange than a deep red and alittle hard to nail down?

cheers,

Pappy


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 28, 2020 11:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:08 pm
Posts: 197
Location: United States
I typically use a mixture of bright red with bit of rust or brown. When the red antifouling is freshly applied, it's intensely red, but over time it gets toned down to a slightly darker and browner color.

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: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:48 pm
Posts: 47
Vepr157 wrote:
I typically use a mixture of bright red with bit of rust or brown. When the red antifouling is freshly applied, it's intensely red, but over time it gets toned down to a slightly darker and browner color.

Jacob


G'day Jacob,

Thanks very much,

cheers,

Pappy


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2020 11:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2020 8:23 pm
Posts: 4
So in doing some research on the George Washington class SSBN's, I noticed that for a time, they carried "fin like projections on top and beside their missile decks. I assume that these are some form of passive sonar as they resemble smaller versions of the PUFFS arrays present on Guppy III and Tullabee. Any knowledge out there on exactly what these are?

USS George Washington: http://navsource.org/archives/08/600/0859832.jpg, http://navsource.org/archives/08/600/0859844.jpg, and http://navsource.org/archives/08/600/0859845b.jpg (November 1960, gone by June 1962)

USS Patrick Henry: http://navsource.org/archives/08/600/0859929.jpg and http://navsource.org/archives/08/600/0859913.jpg (1960-1961)

Thanks!

John


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:08 pm
Posts: 197
Location: United States
I too have been puzzled about these shark fins, and I have not been able to get a good answer as to what they are, even after asking some sailors who were on these boats in the early '60s.

When I first saw them, I had the same thought as you: PUFFS. But there are a few problems with that:

1. PUFFS needs long baselines (~100 feet) to operate, whereas these fins are closely clustered together.

2. They don't fit any of the PUFFS models: BQG-1 (original Thresher and Tullibee systems) had four arrays, BQG-2 (later Thresher, Barb, Blueback, and Sturgeon systems) had three arrays to port and three to starboard, and BQG-4 (GUPPY and later Tullibee systems) had three arrays. The number and arrangement of the fins on the 598 SSBNs is quite different to all of these.

3. They appear to be too thin to fit the PUFFS hydrophones. Even the domes of the Tullibee's BQG-1 system are thicker.

4. None of the BuShips documents I have lists PUFFS as installed or planned equipment for 598-class SSBNs.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the Ethan Allens got BQG-1 for a short period of time (see here: https://www.reddit.com/r/submarines/com ... ass_ssbns/)

My only guess is that the fins somehow were related to tests of the Polaris missile.

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: Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:30 am 
Been reading through this string for several weeks. Thanks for all the great commentary! I just received a MikroMir model of USS Lafayette. Plan to build SSBN-631 (U. S. Grant) with little kit modification. Going to put the boat on a display stand with Dolphins and Nuclear Submarine Deterrent Patrol badge of a buddy of mine.

I'd say my skill level is about 'intermediate' as a model builder of a dozen or so aircraft. This is only my 2nd boat (other was a 1/350 Kriegsmarine Type VII-C). I've been looking over the MikroMir upper/lower hull, done some pre-assembly sanding...but, wow, hull halves are warped, with gaps, do not line up well fore/aft nor port/stbd, and no guide pegs/features.

My usual technique for aircraft fuselage halves is to use a slow-drying glue (the goopy kind), line a bead all the way around one half, fuss with lining up the 2 halves as best I can, then clamp with clothes pins and/or rubber bands.

But I think this MikroMir model might do better with a 'hold parts together and then apply thin liquid (Tamiya) cement to seam' technique. I'm just not familiar with welding large parts using that method. Can any of you amazing modelers point me to a link or video of how to do that? Or...maybe someone with experience can offer suggestions?

Just want this boat to be a worthy display for the dolphins and patrol badge my buddy earned.

Thanks in advance.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 6:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 3:15 pm
Posts: 20
Location: New England
Vepr157 wrote:
I too have been puzzled about these shark fins, and I have not been able to get a good answer as to what they are, even after asking some sailors who were on these boats in the early '60s.

When I first saw them, I had the same thought as you: PUFFS. But there are a few problems with that:

1. PUFFS needs long baselines (~100 feet) to operate, whereas these fins are closely clustered together.

2. They don't fit any of the PUFFS models: BQG-1 (original Thresher and Tullibee systems) had four arrays, BQG-2 (later Thresher, Barb, Blueback, and Sturgeon systems) had three arrays to port and three to starboard, and BQG-4 (GUPPY and later Tullibee systems) had three arrays. The number and arrangement of the fins on the 598 SSBNs is quite different to all of these.

3. They appear to be too thin to fit the PUFFS hydrophones. Even the domes of the Tullibee's BQG-1 system are thicker.

4. None of the BuShips documents I have lists PUFFS as installed or planned equipment for 598-class SSBNs.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the Ethan Allens got BQG-1 for a short period of time (see here: https://www.reddit.com/r/submarines/com ... ass_ssbns/)

My only guess is that the fins somehow were related to tests of the Polaris missile.

Jacob


Jacob - I read the link where you were part of the discussion. To fill in some blanks:

ACINT: Acoustic Intelligence (There is no such thing as a WLR-9 ACINT.) ACINT is a specialty taught to sonarmen, briefly in A-School and later in a more specialized course required for Sonar Supervisors. (It's a tough course.) NISC (Naval Intelligence Support Center) has a cadre of very highly-trained ACINT specialists who are sent out on SSN SPECOPS to advise the captain and sonar gang.

Acoustic Intercept History: DUUG-1, WLR-9, WLR-12, WLR-17. The much more capable Active Emission Detection/Acoustic Intercept systems: WLR-9-17 (built by Norden) used three inboard units. A Control Display in sonar, a remote display on the conn, and a Receiver/Processor in the Sonar Equipment Space. Three hydrophone: A large dome covered the Low Freq on the bow, and a pair of smaller, high frequency hydrophones were located on the top of the sail and keel. It was an outstanding system still in use today.

GNATS: Was not a jammer. (That would give you away; there are much better methods available.) If I remember correctly, the acronym stood for General Noise and Tonal System. It was a capsule-shaped transducer mounted about four feet off the deck near the back of the turtleback and was programmed to mimic the acoustic signature of any boat needed for training other boats. It could generate broadband acoustic noise which would allow a general classification for another passive sonar doing the tracking, or tonals, (discrete narrowband noise to mimic specific machinery sounds.) We had it mounted on the Theodore Roosevelt during her final days in Pearl before heading off to the West coast for decommissioning. While in Pearl, we were a "Vessel of Opportunity" for everything from playing target for wargames to SSN workup training before deploying for SPECOPs. GNATS could be installed rapidly, with the foundation work and cable routing to the nearest hull penetrator taking a couple of days. The control unit was mounted in the Aux Machinery Space and strapped to the deck.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 110 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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