Calling all Virginia-class (SSN-774) fans

[Vepr157]

Circling back on the class as I'm trying to create "the" authoritative list of what dangerous black tubes I want to build.

At this time to it looks like:
Block I/II SSN-774 through SSN-783 - Hobbyboss kit "as is" with the addition of AN/WSQ-9 on the stern planes for SSN-776 and later.
Block III/IV SSN-784 through SSN-801 - Hobbyboss kit with some rescribing on the bow to update VLS and possibly vents, flat topped towed sonar blister, and AN/WSQ-9.
Block V SSN-802 through about SSN-811 - At least a plug to lengthen the hull and add four more VLS as part of the Virginia Payload Module.

Comments / ways I am leading myself astray?

The only thing I would add is that probably all of the Block V will have the Large Vertical Array. It's a large rectangular blister between the forward and mid WAA arrays that wraps around most of the hull on either side. The port array is a bit further back than the starboard array. The South Dakota has it fitted now, and I think it's planned to retrofit onto some of the newer Virginias (and the Columbia class).

Jacob

[ssn705]

Circling back on the class as I'm trying to create "the" authoritative list of what dangerous black tubes I want to build.

At this time to it looks like:
Block I/II SSN-774 through SSN-783 - Hobbyboss kit "as is" with the addition of AN/WSQ-9 on the stern planes for SSN-776 and later.
Block III/IV SSN-784 through SSN-801 - Hobbyboss kit with some rescribing on the bow to update VLS and possibly vents, flat topped towed sonar blister, and AN/WSQ-9.
Block V SSN-802 through about SSN-811 - At least a plug to lengthen the hull and add four more VLS as part of the Virginia Payload Module.

Comments / ways I am leading myself astray?

The only thing I would add is that probably all of the Block V will have the Large Vertical Array. It's a large rectangular blister between the forward and mid WAA arrays that wraps around most of the hull on either side. The port array is a bit further back than the starboard array. The South Dakota has it fitted now, and I think it's planned to retrofit onto some of the newer Virginias (and the Columbia class).

Jacob

I'd just add that Blk I can be modeled "as built" without WSQ-9, but if you choose to add it, the forward WSQ-9s are positioned differently than boats with it from initial build.

The fatline array fairing on Blk III and on is flat on top except on the two removable parts (very front and about midway) where they are rounded like earlier blocks.

Concur Blk V on will have LVA and backfit will likely occur for all but Blk I. I find it interesting that they are not symmetrical port at starboard.

You'll have to add MIP to the kit as well.

Cheers,

Dave

[dwonders]

Is anyone aware of an updated bow section (resin or 3D printed) for the Block III boats with the VLM that replaces the VLS? Or is there a diagram available that shows where a modeler would have to rescribe the VLM's into the bow to do a Block III. I am wanting to model the USS Colorado (SSN-788).

[davidwaples]

Greetings all,
To start I have no affiliation with RCSUBS other than I'm a fanboy of their products and I've worked with him on this particular kit. I've been working with Oto Gerza of RCSUBS.CZ on the Block III variant of the Virginia Class submarine. He has already released the 1/144 Block I version of the boat and now has available the 1/144 Block III version. It's a big model at just under 32 inches. You can also buy it in 1/72 scale. I just ordered mine today! He provides a variety of way to purchase the kit.
Option 1: You receive STL files via download. Plans along with photo etch detail set are mailed to you. You print your own.
Option 2: You receive Printed hull sections off a high resolution Filament PLA printer, STL files, photo etch set, and plans all mailed directly to you.

I purchased one of their German UB-1 models which came in three sections and they match up perfectly. My friend printed them for me on his SLA printer. I expect the same results of this much larger model.

If you check out their web site https://www.rcsubs.cz/index.php you can sell all their products, and Oto also updates his Facebook page regularly.

[ssn705]

There are so many things I love when looking at this kit, but the bow is completely throwing me. The overall shape of the bow looks off and the arrangement of the VLS tubes and VPTs and surrounding areas just seems to miss,. I need to take a longer look, but there are so many things that they seemed to absolutely nail.

Dave

[davidwaples]

There are so many things I love when looking at this kit, but the bow is completely throwing me. The overall shape of the bow looks off and the arrangement of the VLS tubes and VPTs and surrounding areas just seems to miss,. I need to take a longer look, but there are so many things that they seemed to absolutely nail.

Dave

Oto and I poured over every detail. I have the final drawings. The shape of the bow is correct. The VLS/VPT door covers have the proper angle to them. They are not 90 degrees to the center line. The depression around the VLS/VPT area was carefully studied and reproduced. The towed array cover for the Block III was also carefully studied as well as the stern planes and sensors. We also made some minor changes to the sail to reflect Block III. What you don't see here is that Oto also has created all the masts including the photonics. Also included with a high quality photo etch set are proper hull markings (not numbers and names). You can buy the kit complete and printed, or you can get the print file and Oto will send you the photo etch, decals, and plans separately. You won't be disappointed.

[Tracy White]

Direct Link

[ssn705]

There are so many things I love when looking at this kit, but the bow is completely throwing me. The overall shape of the bow looks off and the arrangement of the VLS tubes and VPTs and surrounding areas just seems to miss,. I need to take a longer look, but there are so many things that they seemed to absolutely nail.

Dave

Oto and I poured over every detail. I have the final drawings. The shape of the bow is correct. The VLS/VPT door covers have the proper angle to them. They are not 90 degrees to the center line. The depression around the VLS/VPT area was carefully studied and reproduced. The towed array cover for the Block III was also carefully studied as well as the stern planes and sensors. We also made some minor changes to the sail to reflect Block III. What you don't see here is that Oto also has created all the masts including the photonics. Also included with a high quality photo etch set are proper hull markings (not numbers and names). You can buy the kit complete and printed, or you can get the print file and Oto will send you the photo etch, decals, and plans separately. You won't be disappointed.

Like I said in my first comment, I love the fact that you got so many things right and have so much detail. Some things just stood out to me. The big thing that appears off is the shape of the bow. It may perfectly match your drawing, but I would then question the drawing. On the kit, by the pictures that are posted, the VLS/VPT area appears to be perfectly horizontal (meaning the hull is constant diameter through this area). On the real thing, the diameter of the hull starts to decrease just forward of the "boot" (the fairing at the bottom forward edge of the sail) making the entire VLS/VPT area slope down (at a slightly increasing rate) as you move towards the bow.

What I am seeing could just be a function of the pictures that are posted, but I don't think so.

Other minor comments I would make... the Blk I appears to show the forward OTAAs for WSQ-9 but not the aft ones on the sternplanes like the Blk III. It is all four or none. Blk Is had it back fit so early = none, now = 4. And the "backfit" forward ones are in a different spot from "as built" ones.

Blk I port stem plane doesn't show a towed array tube (you have it on the Blk III)

Dihedrals fair in to the hull like the curve of the sail "boot" but the kit has a 45 degree straight angle

You only give the upper access cover for the starboard external launcher, while port is missing ( your bottom detail here is correct though)

Overall, I think it is a beautiful kit that needs some love for the bow. I am highly impressed by the level of detail across the boat from stem to stern. I'll likely order one myself.

Dave

[davidwaples]

This may help. Here's a segment from Oto's drawings showing the taper from the forward end of the sail. I think you'll be happy with the kit. I purchased his UB-1 submarine in 1/72 scale and it is a masterpiece. Much better than anything else on the market. I would highly recommend printing on a 4k SLA printer. If you don't have one find somebody who does. By doing that you get rid of the screw down towed array covers that you see in the drawings and any striations.

[Vepr157]

It's certainly an excellent effort for a model that did not use official drawings as reference, but like ssn705 said, it's not entirely accurate. It looks like the shape and some details (e.g., MBT flood holes) are similar to drawings I've seen on the Russian airbase forums and the Hobby Boss 1/350 kit, but unfortunately those aren't too accurate. The main issues I see are the bow and stern shapes and the WAA fairings (although in fairness, I have not seen a non-official Virginia model with correct WAA fairings).

Also note that on the Block III and later submarines, the forward MBT flood holes are totally different; they have an unusual splitter shape that you can see in roll-out videos published by NNS or in this photo:

http://navsource.org/archives/08/790/0879817.jpg

This drawing of the South Dakota is accurate (note the WAA fairing spacing and shape) and even has the MSW seachests indicated:

https://i.imgur.com/7HJC9n5.png

These drawings of the various designs for the VPM are also good reference material:

https://i.imgur.com/nXLmoj7.png

Jacob

[davidwaples]

Fair comment about the intakes for the main ballast tanks. I've sent that forward to Oto Gerza, the designer. He's a stickler for detail and will want to address it. The challenge for anyone is getting drawings of these intakes and correct placement. I think about the best that can be done is to interpolate images.

It is correct that the Block I print does not have the extensions on the stern planes. I'll share that with Oto as well.

As far as the fairings go on the planes and dihedrals, the 45 degree angel discussed is a support for printing which is removed. They have the correct finished shape. I don't have permission to share the drawings I have so I'll not do that yet. But if you look at it you can see that they are meant to be removed.

Thanks for the comments. More to come.

[Woodstock74]

Fair comment about the intakes for the main ballast tanks. I've sent that forward to Oto Gerza, the designer. He's a stickler for detail and will want to address it. The challenge for anyone is getting drawings of these intakes and correct placement. I think about the best that can be done is to interpolate images.

It is correct that the Block I print does not have the extensions on the stern planes. I'll share that with Oto as well.

As far as the fairings go on the planes and dihedrals, the 45 degree angel discussed is a support for printing which is removed. They have the correct finished shape. I don't have permission to share the drawings I have so I'll not do that yet. But if you look at it you can see that they are meant to be removed.

Thanks for the comments. More to come.

Any possibility in offering any of these up in 1/350?

[davidwaples]

Fair comment about the intakes for the main ballast tanks. I've sent that forward to Oto Gerza, the designer. He's a stickler for detail and will want to address it. The challenge for anyone is getting drawings of these intakes and correct placement. I think about the best that can be done is to interpolate images.

It is correct that the Block I print does not have the extensions on the stern planes. I'll share that with Oto as well.

As far as the fairings go on the planes and dihedrals, the 45 degree angel discussed is a support for printing which is removed. They have the correct finished shape. I don't have permission to share the drawings I have so I'll not do that yet. But if you look at it you can see that they are meant to be removed.

Thanks for the comments. More to come.

Any possibility in offering any of these up in 1/350?

Not likely. I was lucky to get them sized to 1/144. Typically they do larger scales for the RC submarine community.

[Tracy White]

I'm interested but will wait until the local sub mafia is satisfied that things are ship shape to order one in 1/144.

[Woodstock74]

Not likely. I was lucky to get them sized to 1/144. Typically they do larger scales for the RC submarine community.

Yeah for sure, 1/350 is purely for the static modeling community. A shame the Hobby Boss 1/350 kit is trash.

[davidwaples]

Hi Steve,
I think a proper 1/350 Virginia Class would be great. You may want to see if you can work something out with Oto Gerza with RCSUBS as he's done the lions share of the work already. I'm not sure if he's interested but I don't think he has any ambitions to work with 1/350 models on his own. If you would like an introduction let me know.

I don't think there's much controversy about what Oto has done. There's some discussion about the bow section. However looking at drawings on the web there are a lot of inconsistencies. Photos can suffer from distortion. I've sent him the information about the updated bow flood holes. The aft seem to be unchanged. You might try reaching out to General Dynamics Electric Boat.

My favorite source of photos is seaforces.org. They have excellent high resolution photos that show a lot of detail, short of the propulsor.

Hard to know what block IV and V will really look like. The idea has been made public, but they have not been built yet so anything is just speculation. I would concentrate on a Block II and/or Block III.

Dave

[davidwaples]

I've sent the photos that show (what there is to show) of the bow main ballast tank flood holes, or whatever they are called today. I think I have it pretty close and the rest needs to be interpreted from photos. Keep in mind that I don't have a good CAD package and this is about as good as I can do with the limited resources I have. Please be kind! I laid these over Oto's current plans. I have no personal interest in this project except that I'm like most of you and would like a good product which I believe Oto delivers.

What is unclear are the coverings of the four most aft vents and if there are any more vents past what is shown in the photos already provided. Also the finished covering of those vents. The aft vents according to photos I've seen of Block III seem to be unchanged. If anyone can show anything different please let me know.

Anyway, comments are welcome.

[Vepr157]

davidwaples,

Nice work! In regard to the flood holes, there is a second group for MBT3 located at about the same distance back as the sail fillet. All of the forward flood holes have the splitter design (not sure why some of the aft ones on the MBT1/2 group don't have them in the photo above). This video has a view good views of them (also note the WLY-1 dome next to the MBT3 group):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMRFG5av-rc

You're right, the aft group of flood holes looks the same as the previous Blocks with the perforated grating cover, as evidenced by this photo (note the anchor; the SPM/SPU opening is on the other side):

http://navsource.org/archives/08/780/0878505w.jpg

Block IV is easy to model, because as far as I'm aware they are externally identical to the Block III. You could probably make a pretty good Block V from two sources of information, this EB slide and these photos I took of a (seemingly very accurate) Block V model at the Pearl Harbor museum:

https://i.imgur.com/7hYkuss.jpg
https://imgur.com/a/KXPnjPG

You can get a better view of the LVA here:

https://www.dvidshub.net/image/6858405/ ... d-ceremony

ModelMonkey,

If you used that drawing of the South Dakota above, you'd end up with a very accurate hull form. The appendages are the wrong size, but the hull and WAA faring forms are exactly correct. The position of the forward WAA arrays is a bit further forward (~6 feet) than on other Virginias to avoid interference with the LVA.

In terms of the propulsor, there is unclassified material sufficient to make a decent representation. There are a few photos on navsource that show the rotor on the nearly complete submarine draped in a tarp, and you can get an idea of the number and shape of the blades. NNS also leaves a few rotors and stators outside the building hall in tarps that can be found using google earth (you might have to use the feature of google earth to wind back time for the image date).

Jacob

Edit: And just to be clear, no classified information here

[Woodstock74]

Two years ago I started thinking about an upgrade to the 1/350 Bronco Seawolf model, part of which entailed reworking the pumpjet. Going back and forth with Jacob Gunnarson (apologies, I have this disconnect between forum names and real names and don't recall his forum name) to at least hash out the basics (and get some of the really bad concepts out of the way), I ended up with this; 11 blade screw with 19 pre-stators and post-13 stators. Trying to re-read and baseline emails from 2 years ago and I'm not sure I executed correctly what Jacob was saying, but at least it's miles better from where I started:









The second issue, and where this ultimately stalled, was working out how to print this so that the support structure didn't obliterate the details. Anyhow, I can imagine the Virginia class' pumpjet would basically be similar barring no stators aft of the screw, I think that was my takeaway from Jacob?

[Vepr157]

Wow that looks great Given that there are no public details about the Seawolf pumpjet beyond the fact that it has a rotor between two stators, I think this is a very plausible-looking model. One thing to check is the size of the duct against satellite images (if you haven't done that already). The Greg Sharpe Seawolf drawing that's out there appears to be remarkably accurate in many respects, but the duct is way too short (and I think the real one looks to have a fair bit of camber to the duct section).

Yeah, the Virginia pumpjet just has a stator upstream of the rotor.

Jacob