3D Parts Development for possible T-3 Tanker Project - 1/144

[BB62vet]

Thanks, Tom - and a good analogy of the hobby in a nutshell. More than just cement, sticks, & so forth.

On a couple other fronts - I've used Tom's APA accommodation ladder as a basis for the one that will adorn the T-3 - I've made necessary size changes and based on the Gen. Arrgt. drawing have this one that should go to printing later this week:

Stbd side ladder is shown on the plans - but, if need be, I'll modify this to make one in a stowed position for the port side - another mini-research project to find out WHERE this was stowed.

The G.A. is totally vague on the RADAR set specified on these ships and I've come to the conclusion that some T-3s had SK, some had SC - there doesn't seem to be a pattern or scheme as to what was installed. This is one of the tech. aspects of the individual ship specifics that's missing from NavSource listings as well as individual ship listings on Auke Visser's Famous T Tanker Pages - an otherwise excellent source of info. So, based on what might be (the photos are hazy) installed on one of the 4 ships built at Sparrow Point, MD in this contract (AO-97, 98, 99, 100) I have decided on SC-2 antenna with IFF mounted above and have designed this in DSM:

Having consulted with Tom for using on his DSM, he did a bit of beefing up of struts and then I added some further details to arrive at what is hopefully a respectful looking antenna.

I'm continuing to print further hull sections which take a day (8.5 hours) to print each and have a few more to do. That will finish the straight, center section of the hull, which comprises about 16" in length. Once this center section is assembled, sanded, and ready for paint (but NOT painted), I'll then begin back on work on the fwd superstructure and pick up where I left off a month or so ago.

Hank

[Fliger747]

These look much more airy in the flesh. I have used a ribbon material which has a very open mesh for screens etc before, stretched and then dry brushed to seize it (very light airbrush works also using an air blast to make sure paint doesn't clog the mesh) . However in this instance the dipoles on the front make such an application difficult. At any distance these radars pretty much just have the main frame parts visible, so the overall effect is preserved, full modeling will often give an impression of lack of transparency. Dang compromise!

It's a nice unit Hank!

[BB62vet]

Thanks, Tom!! Next week I'll get this printed (w/accom. ldr.) and see what happens! Maybe have the SPS-10 for STODDARD design finished - a bit of work to get the backside supports aligned properly.

Hank

[DrPR]

Hank,

The frame on the back of the SPS-10 antenna was a real brain teaser when I made the model for the OK City. I had a tech manual for the antenna and the blueprint for the mounting arrangement to work from. Here are a couple of images. The antenna had a bunch of parallel slats - like window shades - on the front side of the frame. There is no way that is going to print correctly!

[Fliger747]

R Buckminster Fuller would be proud of that framework. Despite the considerable capabilities of our printers, the characteristics of the resins usually can't realize what we can actually print into a successful part. Larger scales are better, but then not all of us have room in the pool for a 1:10 scale Battleship.

Keep pushing the limits!

[BB62vet]

Phil,
Great shots of your A/N SPS-10 unit - I've referenced you over on my STODDARD build re. your drawing, etc. These photos show what I've not gotten put into place - the horizontal reflector ribs (2) - so that will be something to work on next. Yes, I doubt that the "window shade" ribbons would print, possibly in 1/96 scale, but most certainly not at all at 1/144 or smaller.

The reflector supports in back are, as you mentioned, a PITA to design - mine "look" correct but will probably fail to print because of diameter. Tom has offered to help me beef up those particular supports. In DSM, these individual solids become one piece when joined together rather than remaining separate entities (unless you put each on a separate layer! - NOT HAPPENING!!). I've also got to slim down the width of the vertical reflector frame members as your views have pointed out. Here's what my efforts look like presently:

This is an unscaled version drawn from your drawing (lower right side) using those views to dimension with the printout at 11x17. So, my scaled version will end up 36% of this design model. The only things I've left off of the pedestal base are the various nuts as they simply would not print at 1/144 scale.

So, always something to do in this venue - nothing static, always dynamic & fluid!!! And Tom is correct - it does look like something out of Buckmaster Fuller's world!

Hank

[Fliger747]

I think we called him some version of Pucky Buller at the time. Of course Song could make one of these out of bamboo slivers that would put us all to shame.

Tom

[DrPR]

Hank,

All of the tubing on the antenna was the same diameter, so you can beef up the rear supports a bit.

This is the "A" version of the antenna, which technically was the antenna assembly AS-936(A). The "B" version included a smaller reflector below the bottom tube on our models. I'm not sure when it went into service.

I got a photocopy of the Technical Manual NAVSHIPS 0967-156-3040 (April 1970) from a fellow on the USS Midway. It has exploded parts diagrams for the whole thing, so if I really wanted to be obsessive about modelling it I could include all the internal parts. I may be a rivet counter, but I am not that anal!

I haven't done the 3D print version of the antenna yet or I would share the STL file with you. My original CAD file is made up of zero thickness 2D surfaces and has more holes and leaks that a piece of Swiss cheese.

Phil

[BB62vet]

Phil,

Thanks - I appreciate the background on your work! Tom assisted in beefing up the support structure and then I scaled down to size. Your 2D drawing was quite useful in dimensioning the 3D version. Two different drawings for two totally different purposes.

Anyhow, I hope to print a test version next week sometime, so we'll know what works etc. I think I've updated my STODDARD build with this info as that's where it actually is being used.

Hank

[Fliger747]

Tis a pity that Phil's beautiful 3D illustrations translate with difficulty to actual fungible items. I'm sure he will get it worked out. Looking forward to seeing the hull come together, it IS (Clintonian emphasis) a learning progress. Especially on a first hull by printing. Will you have enough sections done to start building up the superstructure?

Cheers: Tom

[BB62vet]

Tis a pity that Phil's beautiful 3D illustrations translate with difficulty to actual fungible items. I'm sure he will get it worked out. Looking forward to seeing the hull come together, it IS (Clintonian emphasis) a learning progress. Especially on a first hull by printing. Will you have enough sections done to start building up the superstructure? Cheers: Tom

Tom,
Well, such is drawing in 2D, designing & printing in 3D - as for the hull, I have the first after section (moving from amidships astern) ready to be sanded and then added to the overall central hull assembly. Perhaps a picture tomorrow a.m. to show what progress has been made. Got to get the upper plan views laid out and measurements taken before proceeding in either direction as the hull shape is now beginning to change. As for the superstructure - YES! I will need to get back and revisit that set of designs & parts.

Along those lines, a larger printer capacity would be advantageous in being able to print these parts as a single item rather than the slice & dice approach I've taken up to this point (as you know yourself). So, I'm still considering this move - the product specials are still in effect at the moment.

Hank

[KimmerWerft]

Hank

Hope that all is well. I recently discovered the hiding place for my old CANISTEO (AO-99) photos and have attached a few below for when the ship was in drydock, so you can see the hull shape (a bit). In one of the bow photos you can just make out the paravane skeg, which the ship still had in the mid-late 80's.

Note that these photos are post-jumbo, so the stern photo shows the starboard rudder as modified. The ships as originally built had a single, centerline rudder.

And yes, we went to drydock twice in a year. The first was a scheduled overhaul and the second was some months after coming out of the overhaul to fix a rudder bearing that the shipyard goofed up.

[BB62vet]

John,

Thanks so much for the photos. Yes, the first 2 may be of some help reference-wise.

I haven't been working on this project for a while as I'm trying to get my FLETCHER class DD build completed. Hope to return to this in the future.

Thanks again!!

Hank