The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:05 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
Blue Ridge Models announcement at the IPMS 2012 Nationals of a soon-to-be-released USN Tang Class (SS-567 - USS Cudgeon) kit in 1:350 scale resin prompts the start of this thread.

Here's a link to the kit and box art, on display: http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=109821

These subs were the first class of US subs that benefitted from the GUPPY program from the design stage through construction. The hull form developed for this class saw use in the first US nuclear boats as well. The model depicts the USS Gudgeon, likely in her 1958 fit. The ship was lengthened in 1968 to accomodate the PUFFS sonar system.

There appears to be some variation in the sail design between ships, and possibly across service lives, in this class as well - at least four different sail types that I note in photos on Wikipedia. AFV Models Guppy Class kits may provide an easy alternative for customizing your boats with a Portsmouth or Electric Boat sail, but the circa 1969 saild on the Trout is like neither of these.

The six ships in this class have an interesting disposal history, including transfers to the Italian and Turkish Navies, and unfulfilled transfers to the Imperial Iranian Navy as well:

Tang (SS-563): transferred to Turkish Navy in 1987 and serving as TCG Pirireis (S 343). Now a museum ship in Turkey.

Trigger (SS-564): transferred to Italy in 1973 and served as Livio Piomarta until she was decommissioned on 28 February 1986.

Wahoo (SS-565): intended for 1979 transfer to the Imperial Iranian Navy and renamed Nahang. These plans were cancelled on 31 March 1979 following the Iranian revolution. Wahoo was instead decommissioned on 27 June 1980 and cannibalized for parts for the other Tangs that were still in service to foreign governments. In November 1984 her hulk was sold for scrap.

Trout (SS-566): intended for 1978 transfer to the Imperial Iranian Navy. Upon completion of the overhaul in 1978, Trout's home port was shifted to New London, Connecticut, where a training period for her the Iranian crew ensued. The training program was completed on 19 December 1978, and that day the U.S. Navy simultaneously decommissioned Trout, struck her from the Naval Vessel Register, and transferred her to Iran. The Imperial Iranian Navy renamed her Imperial Iranian Ship (IIS) Kousseh (SS 101), meaning "Shark". Her Iranian crew took control of her at New London in December 1978, but abandoned her there in March 1979 following the Iranian Revolution. Kousseh was returned to Philadelphia, where she languished for many years while the United States resolved financial matters related to her abortive transfer to Iran. Kousseh finally was returned officially to U.S. custody in 1992. She was sold at scrap value to the U.S. Navy's Program Executive Office for Undersea Warfare in 1994 and moored at Newport, Rhode Island. She was then acquired by the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division Key West Detachment at Key West, Florida, for use by the Naval Air Systems Command Marine and Targets Detachment as a remotely controlled submersible sonar target ship, as an underwater acoustic target for antisubmarine warfare research and development, in operational testing, and for training. Subsequently held at the Ship Maintenance Facility at Philadelphia, where the U.S. Navy held her for donation to a museum, but all preservation efforts failed. Her scrapping was completed on 27 February 2009.

Gudgeon (SS-567):Harder (SS-568):In 1983, Gudgeon was transferred by lease to Turkey and renamed TCG HIZIRREİS (S 342). She was purchased in 1987 and served until 2004. She is berthed as a museum ship at the Kocaeli Museum Ships Command and is open to the public.

Harder (SS-568): Harder was decommissioned on 31 January 1974, and sold to Italy. Re-commissioned on 18 August 1974 as Romeo Romei (S-516); scrapped in 1988.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 10396
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
I was on Gudgeon/Hizirreis when I was in Turkey - so it would be nice if BRM would come out with a late model Tang kit and Dragon a FRAM Gearing ;):


Attachments:
P1180556.jpg
P1180556.jpg [ 171.31 KiB | Viewed 4221 times ]
P1180633.jpg
P1180633.jpg [ 127.13 KiB | Viewed 4221 times ]
P1180634.jpg
P1180634.jpg [ 148.35 KiB | Viewed 4221 times ]

_________________
Yo dawg, I heard you like PE, so I put some PE in your PE so you can use PE on your PE.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:24 am
Posts: 1246
Location: Saint-Andiol, France
Some photos of Romeo Romei and Livio Piomarta. Both their namesakes were WW II submariners.

Piomarta was 84.7 m long, Romei was 90.2 m. The latter also had a pair of fixed fins aft and the aft PUFFS was in a different position.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

_________________
Image


Last edited by Secondo on Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
Great post, Secondo! Wonderful resources for modelers of these subs post transfer to Italy!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:24 am
Posts: 1246
Location: Saint-Andiol, France
I'm glad you liked them. As you can see in those photos, submarines are among the few units that can navigate the Taranto channel with the bridge being still closed (meaning that it's open to city traffic, closed to ships). Submariners consider this a well deserved privilege, as they can stare at girls passing on the bridge from an excellent vantage point.

By the way, some more photos of Romei can be found on Navsource. Unfortunately, no photos of girls' legs taken from the submarine exist :frown_2:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08568.htm

I'm waiting to know more about Blue Ridge's model in order to plan the surgery needed to convert it to one of the Italian boats. Perhaps they will also release a later version.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2012 12:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
Secondo wrote:
I'm waiting to know more about Blue Ridge's model in order to plan the surgery needed to convert it to one of the Italian boats. Perhaps they will also release a later version.


Look/talk to "Fritz" on this board. He is the CAD designer of this kit. He has posted in the Blue Ridge Models threads in the Manufactures section.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
I ordered last week and the Tang Class USS Gudgeon arrived today - just gorgeous. About 9 inches in length, resin and PE parts, beautifully packed like the Nautilus. Instructions and a reference CD.

Texture of casting is very fine, better than the BRM Nautilus that I ordered earlier this year. All details are cleanly cast in the hull and sail.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Minneapolis
My BRM USS Gudgeon arrived today too. I agree, the packaging is first rate
as is the casting detail. According to my "Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet,
11th edition" by Norman Polmar, as built, the Tang class was 269 ft in length.
Comes to 9.22" in 1/350 and the model measures right about there. If one
wanted to modify the BRM Gudgeon to a PUFFS boat, 5/8" (18ft) of hull will
have to be added to the length (among other changes).

So, who knows where the 18ft section was added? In front of the sail? Aft of
the sail? I'm hoping it is just aft of the sail, because the hull does not start
to taper inward until about an inch past the sail (looking down on top of the
sub).

Also, anyone have clear photos/plans of what that plastic sail looks like?
And....those PUFFS fins are going to be fun.

Comments/information will be appreciated.

Well, gotta get back to my 1/350 Parche superstretch and RBR w/bustle :)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
SailorBill wrote:
My BRM USS Gudgeon arrived today too. I agree, the packaging is first rate
as is the casting detail. According to my "Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet,
11th edition" by Norman Polmar, as built, the Tang class was 269 ft in length.
Comes to 9.22" in 1/350 and the model measures right about there. If one
wanted to modify the BRM Gudgeon to a PUFFS boat, 5/8" (18ft) of hull will
have to be added to the length (among other changes).

So, who knows where the 18ft section was added? In front of the sail? Aft of
the sail? I'm hoping it is just aft of the sail, because the hull does not start
to taper inward until about an inch past the sail (looking down on top of the
sub).

Also, anyone have clear photos/plans of what that plastic sail looks like?
And....those PUFFS fins are going to be fun.

Comments/information will be appreciated.

Well, gotta get back to my 1/350 Parche superstretch and RBR w/bustle :)


Spend some time with the photos on the cd. Given the reason for lengthening, I would think most - all - of the length is aft of the sail. And it appears that PUFFS components included features below waterline, at least in the stern.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 435
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Quote:
Well, gotta get back to my 1/350 Parche superstretch


Like this, you mean?


Attachments:
Parche model-1.jpg
Parche model-1.jpg [ 146.17 KiB | Viewed 4086 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
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Minneapolis
Tom, yes, very similar to that one. Mine will be waterline. But......let's not
hijack the Tang thread. Is there one for US spy subs...or Sturgeon class?

The BRM Gudgeon has a few model engineering possibilities. I'm hoping a
fellow modeler/naval history buff has some plan-views or scale drawings
to help plan a PUFFS project. I am a former surface pingjockey and I like
ASW-related subjects.

Seems like BRM is quite ontrack with their submarine model kit subjects.
There goes my lunch money.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
Tom Dougherty wrote:
Quote:
Well, gotta get back to my 1/350 Parche superstretch


Like this, you mean?


Hah - more photos, Tom. And let's see that underside!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Minneapolis
This is in reference to a post by Tom over in the "pics from the Nats" thread by Brandon.
Tom, I read your reply and just want to review what you said. The first four Tang boats
were built to a length of 267 ft (rounded off) and then had 9 ft added due to engine changes.
Then, at 277 ft (again, rounded-off) two boats had another 9 ft added for PUFFS. That brings
the 563 and 565 to a length of 285 ft. Gudgeon and Harder were built with the first 9 ft addition
incorporated (again due to the engines). They later had the other 9 ft addition (PUFFS) which
brought their length to 285 ft.

So, you are saying all 4 PUFFS boats (563, 565, 567 and 568) ended up being 285 ft long. Correct?
I wonder where the length of 302 ft comes from? Saw it somewhere on the web (it's gotta be true).

I measured my BRM Gudgeon and got just short of 9.25". That is 269 ft full-size. Which is what
several books I've skimmed say is the original Tang class length. And, several side elevation drawings
(when brought to 1/350 scale) show all the length was added forward of the sail (when compared
to the BRM hull). Planning a PUFFS version is not easy when there seems to be different versions
of what (and where) was done to the hull.

Opinion/advice/information is most welcome.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:24 pm 
SailorBill wrote:
I measured my BRM Gudgeon and got just short of 9.25". That is 269 ft full-size. Which is what
several books I've skimmed say is the original Tang class length. And, several side elevation drawings
(when brought to 1/350 scale) show all the length was added forward of the sail (when compared
to the BRM hull). Planning a PUFFS version is not easy when there seems to be different versions
of what (and where) was done to the hull.

Opinion/advice/information is most welcome.


Clearly time for a Tang Class CASF thread field trip to the museum ship in Turkey.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 10396
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
Bring some scuba gear ;)

Here is the full album I took, though it's mostly of the FRAM Gearing: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set= ... 97bfb857e8

If there are specific pictures you would like in High rez, let me know.

The difficulty with getting better pictures is that the tour on board is guided, and they don't take you to the bow of the ship from which to take good pictures of the ex-Gudgeon's bow (unless your Turkish is good enough to convince them otherwise).

_________________
Yo dawg, I heard you like PE, so I put some PE in your PE so you can use PE on your PE.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:03 pm
Posts: 125
Location: Salem, MA, USA
SailorBill wrote:
The first four Tang boats
were built to a length of 267 ft (rounded off) and then had 9 ft added due to engine changes.
Then, at 277 ft (again, rounded-off) two boats had another 9 ft added for PUFFS. That brings
the 563 and 565 to a length of 285 ft. Gudgeon and Harder were built with the first 9 ft addition
incorporated (again due to the engines). They later had the other 9 ft addition (PUFFS) which
brought their length to 285 ft.

So, you are saying all 4 PUFFS boats (563, 565, 567 and 568) ended up being 285 ft long. Correct?
I wonder where the length of 302 ft comes from? Saw it somewhere on the web (it's gotta be true).


Ahhh.. The bane of research.. The internet...

Let me help to totally muddy the waters for you.. In my research for this kit, I found myself focused on two boats.

The kit wound up being the Gudgeon because that was the boat I had the most hard data for. From BuShips DWG#S0500-93609 and DWG# S1206-933134-ALT4 (the first being dated 4/21/51 the second having ALT4 dated 4/30/53) which were contemporary and up to date with the vessel as built, show an overall length for Gudgeon of 268ft 6-7/8inches.

Now, If you look on the internet, this is "the original length" for all the Tang class boats. Even the Official Tang website states so and then says the original Gudgeon length was 277ft.. SO.. what gives..

Well the answer is this.. Someone got the original Tang length wrong, and then everyone on the net proceeded to copy it.

Originally, this project should have only taken me four months to finish, but ultimately wound up taking me 2 years of free time to finish because these numbers did not add up..

What I finally found was this.. the original Tang hull plan (BuShips DWG# S0101-919905 ALT2 dated 6/3/49). This shows the original length for Tang as 263ft 7-1/2inches.

Now this is only 5 ft of difference..HOWEVER.. The Tang was lengthened by 9 ft, I.E three frame spaces(3ft each) in the engine room bringing her to 272ft 7-1/2inches AFTER her engine conversion.

As Gudgeon was altered during her construction, they added these three Frame spaces (9ft) in engineering, yet at the same time, for whatever reason, they shortened her control space by two frames (at 2ft spacing for a total of 4ft). SO.. Now the Gudgeon, as built, is only 5ft (9ft-4ft) longer than the Tang at commissioning. The remaining 5/8inch difference is due to the stem on the Gudgeon being slightly steeper(more vertical)..

As for whether the puffs extensions were 18ft or 15ft, I have absolutely no clue.I stopped my research there for other reasons (girls , sailing, wanted to actually build a physical model etc..) so I'll leave it up to you guys to do the math for that one.. :heh:

_________________
Best Regards

Fritz K.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 1:57 pm
Posts: 1256
Location: Hamden, CT
Fritz, your research and assistance are so welcome.

Sweet little kit. I've primed the sail, scopes and planes, and will have the hull cleaned up and primed this weekend. Clean-up is minor - the resin pour stubs and a few pin-prick size holes in the casting at the stern.

Glad you've reclaimed other parts of your life!

- D-Boy


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 435
Location: Ayer, Ma. USA
Quote:
Now, If you look on the internet, this is "the original length" for all the Tang class boats. Even the Official Tang website states so and then says the original Gudgeon length was 277ft.. SO.. what gives..

Well the answer is this.. Someone got the original Tang length wrong, and then everyone on the net proceeded to copy it.


I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, to find that out!! Round up the usual suspects...

Yeah, that's why I used the two Norman Friedman books (US submarines.....) for my figures.

_________________
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 Sep 03, 2012 4:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Minneapolis
Finally have time to comment on recent posts.

Tim: Thank you for the field trip photos. Some very nice ones with good lighting
and composition. Yes, there are some that I would like to have in Hi-resolution.
Can I pm you on which ones?

Fritz: A big thank you for taking time to tell your story. I understand your comment
about the numbers didn't add up. I feel the finished product reflects the amount of
hours you spent researching the subject and coming upon the best decision on what
the model should represent. The attention to detail is very much appreciated. I still
am interested in converting the boat to a PUFFS version. Heck, the research is a big
part of the fun and a learning experience to boot.

Tom: I am going to have to agree with you and use the Norman Friedman (and Norman
Polmar) books as a major reference point to start at. I am going with the side profile
drawings of the Tang PUFFS version on page 30 of Friedman's "US Subs Since 1945".
I made several hi-quality copies , scaled to 1/350 at 9.78" (285 ft) bow to stern. I took
the BRM Gudgeon and compared the hull to the scaled copy. I lined up the front edge of
the sail (where it meets the deck) with the same point on the model. It appears to me
that all the length needed to stretch the hull to a PUFFS boat would be just forward of the
sail edge (to keep things simple). So I'm going with a finished length of 285 feet actual.

If any more information on PUFFS version surfaces (no pun intended), please post. I
recently stumbled across many good exterior photos of Tang class boats on photobucket.

By the way, I've been a design draftsman since 1977. So I am use to scaling things, very
tight tolerances and that darn-good inches-feet-yards system. "Metric? We don't need no
stinking metric". (Apologies to Blazing Saddles).

Later........


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 7:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 10396
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
Let me know, Bill!

_________________
Yo dawg, I heard you like PE, so I put some PE in your PE so you can use PE on your PE.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

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

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