The Ship Model Forum

Hi,

my mobile workbench has been delivered last night. I can now work on all sides of the ship at a convenient height for my back.

Hi 109
Work shop looks great .Is that a G model 109 on the wall ?

Richard J OMalley wrote:Hi 109
Work shop looks great .Is that a G model 109 on the wall ?

Hi,

no, it�s a beautiful print of the V14, see here:

http://static.twoday.net/FLYINGART/imag ... purpur.jpg

hi bernd,very nice work table,and a very nicely lite work room,i am imprressed .hull is looking good to.

Hi Bernd The hull is developing well . I am green with envy looking at your "mobile" bench and the space you have in your work room .I would love to be able to work from both sides of the model , that would be modelling heaven .
Dave Wooley

Dave Wooley wrote:Hi Bernd The hull is developing well . I am green with envy looking at your "mobile" bench and the space you have in your work room .I would love to be able to work from both sides of the model , that would be modelling heaven .
Dave Wooley

I am happy to have my own workshop! My wife thinks so, too!

Bye!

Some work on the center shaft housing and keel ...

?

Hello Bernd,

Thanks for clarifying the subject before I ask. I've allways though that this part of the keel would need a fairing piece, otherwise a lot of turbulence would reach the propeller behind. I have never see a picture of the Bismarck showing that, but certainly the photos of the Tirpitz wreck show it clearly.

I think you add this piece at the frame 24.25 (Position 2 in Mickosh3 drawing is at 24.00), so the next frame indicated in your last post should be 23.75, but the end of the fairing piece (I don't know how to call it) at 0 level is not indicted. Neverless I gess the total lenght of the piece is about 1400 mm at the aforementionned level. Am I right ? How about the lenght on top ? Is it at the frame 21.5?

I imagine that this piece was added later in the drydock because in the drawings I have is not shown. Could you please clarify.
Very interesting detail indeed. Not too many models are build including that feature.

Kind regards.

Rafael

Sorry I made a mistake. I mean 20.90 instead of 21.50
Bye.

Rafael

Mickosh3 wrote:!

Hi, Bernd!

Ok, it means you have the more detailed drawings than Galley's ones.

Could you, please, add some additional info in your reply?
For example - Spt. xx.x coordinates? or a picture?
Was the part ( a cowling?) formed with the whole hull or added later, in the dock?

Rafael wrote:
Thanks for clarifying the subject before I ask. I've allways though that this part of the keel would need a fairing piece, otherwise a lot of turbulence would reach the propeller behind.

Yes, I think so, too. May be Evert-Jan can make a statement on this here.

I have never see a picture of the Bismarck showing that, but certainly the photos of the Tirpitz wreck show it clearly.

Go back to page 16 and look for the original photo of Bs in the drydock. I think it was already in place and I do not see any reason why it should have been added later.

Neverless I guess the total lenght of the piece is about 1400 mm at the aforementionned level. Am I right ?

Yes, I think it�s about 1350 mm ...

Very interesting detail indeed. Not too many models are build including that feature.

Kind regards.

Rafael

I added the Leitblech temporarily to the hull and added the info on frame numbers and measurements. Picture shows my reconstruction of this area.

Many thanks for your reply Bernd. The pictures show the necessary info to reproduce that piece, except for the shape of the fairing at different levels. I imagine that the trailing edge of the "Leitblech" is parallel to the profile line you had before. Can you tell us what is the shape of this piece at level 1400 mm? I mean in a similar way you made it in the picture Hacke_Leitblech_01 posted on January 09.

I though this part was added later in the drydock because in the drawing I have is not shown and in the picture you mentionned is not evident, but looking at it carefully, your rigth it seems that the famous Leitblech is there.

For Mickosh3: In your Gally plans, the position 0 coincide with the original drawings of the battleship. Every section is at 120 mm from each other except sections indicated as 1/4, 1/2, etc.. they are proportionally smaller (I mean 30, 60, etc). Apparently the original hull lines of the ship were drawn at 12000 mm intervals in scale of 1/100. It means 120 mm. Concerning the frames we were talking about, they were located at 21.5 m from the frame 0.00, for example... Look at the picture Bernd gave us. He has indicated frame 24.25, 22.2, 20.8 and so on. Remember that frame 0.00 is at 3.00 m from the stern.

Many thanks again Bernd. May be one day I can visit you for a moment and have a look on your model. I live in Switzerland, not too far a way from Germany's border.

Rafael

Hi Rafael,

you�re always welcome! Perhaps we can arrange a meeting this summer? Other modelers are also welcome for a "Battleship barbeque"!

I have to do some fine tuning on the Leitblech, it should start at frame 21,0, mine is at 20,9 so far. The cross section on the top is reconstructed by sanding the wedge till it has the right shape. Bottom cross section is as posted somewhere above!

The tip of the Leitblech starts 50 mm above the keel level at frame 21,0 and ends 12 mm above the flat keel at frame 24,25. This is because the Leitblech was not part of the docking keel and was constructed from 10 mm sheet metal as compared to the 22 mm plating of the docking keel A. So, it was kept above the keel level to avoid damages from accidentially placing the ship with the Leitblech on the docking stapels.

Bye!

PS: Die Tante meiner Frau lebt in Marthalen!

Ok, Rafael , there is the Gally's drawings more commented:



It means: no Leitblech in Gally's drawing!

Where is a true?

Mickosh3:

Yes indeed, in Hans Gally drawings is not indicated the Heck Leitblech. The starboard profile clearly show no Leitblech at all. In the profile drawings of the Tirpitz it is not mentionned either. Neverless, the photos of the Tirpitz wreck show clearly that piece as Bernd says.

From the hydraulic point of view it is not wise to have a keel of about 1600 mm wide x 1400 mm height (mean values) so close to the center of the propeller. This big surface perpendicular to the ship motion, could create turbulence that finally would get the blades and creates problems, vibration, cavitation etc. So installing such device would reduce this phenomena considerbily. In my opinion, from the hydraulic point of view, the lack of this Leitblech would be a more seriuos problem compared to the chines of the hull that Bernd showed us in his model's pictures.

In conclusion, Mickosh3, I would say that the true is that Bismarck had the Leitblech installed. And yes, Bernd has a copy of the original drawings of our favorite ship and much more information than Gally plans.

Best regards.

Rafael

Hi, Rafael, thank you for the detailed reply!

I make my Bismarck as detailed as possible, so every new "bug" is very important.

With best regards,
Mickosh3

Hi,

the GALLY plan is a copy of the original 1/100 scale drawing of the hull - this is more of an overview that an highly detailed and accurate construction drawing.

Please post pictures of your work on bismarck, too!

Bye!

Hi,
There is my 1/200 Bismarck's hull. Now my "reconstruction" is finished (almost); the hull is ready for finish sanding, primering and painting. All details of the hull made in according with dockplan (thanks, Bernd!) and avaliable pictures. Some details are to change- particulary, S-transmitters, and , possible, the Heck Leitblech.








With best regards,
Mickosh3