Reconstruction of hull, Battleship BISMARCK, 1/100 scale

[109]

[Rafael]

Hi!

I am getting green of envy looking at yours models. When I look at my CAD model I realise that I have to work harder to accomplish half of both of you guys have up to now. But one day, in 2013 I will start to cutting plates, mounting every section, welding and so on. This year I have to build the house and the shipyard as well as the drydock. In the mean time I have to advance in my CAD Bismarck model as much as possible. The hull should finished on March this year because the house construction will start in that month and then not too much time will be available.

I shall keep an eye on this thread, it is very inspiring.

Rafael

[Rafael]

By the way,what is that line in Mickos3 model that run from bow to stern like a cable? A degaussing cable may be? I have never see it before ?

On the other hand what is the S transmitters ? The hydrophones in a horseshoe form near the bow ?

Rafael

[Mickosh3]

Hallo, everybody!

Yes, Rafael, the cable is my improvisaton about MES (antimagnetic system). On my opinion, the cable should pass around the WHOLE hull (like a coil, and the hull is a mandrel ). I didn't find a picture of the cable, only short description. The only "live" info is there (A-arrows):




About S-trasmitters: it were components of sound-location system, not GHG you mentioned; also, I can't find true evidens about the form of the transmitters.The only info is (Gneiisenau) :

http://www.scharnhorst-class.dk/http:// ... ejuno.html

If someone have the more detailed info, it will be very helpfull!

With best regards,
Mickosh3

[109]

Hi,

"A" does not mark the MES but the "Panzerst�tzblech", part of the side armor support structure.

CU!

[Mickosh3]

Hi, Bernd,
Ok, but the only question: why the armor support is performed from an anticorrosion and antimagnetic metal (Zn, as it looked)?

And Tirpitz consruction drawing shows, that the stern armor was mounted in a spesial deepenings in the hull

And: the lower edge of sterh atmor wasn't a horizontal line!


??

[109]

Hi,

anodes can be seen on the V-struts of the outer shaft (marked as B in your photo).

A marks the point where the Panzerst�tzblech laps on the watertight shell (the armor plating is not designed to establish the water tightness of the hull, it�s the shell plating behind the side armor that keeps the hull water tight).

I attached a schematic drawing of it.

Bye.

[Mickosh3]

Yes, Bernd, it is correct, but only for the side armor - it was mounted, when hull was floating. The stern armor was mounted directly on shipyard!

What says your detail drawing about the line A and the MES cable?

With best regards,
Mickosh3

[109]

Hi ,

I was confused thru your picture of your hull ... the MES seems to be placed too high on your model ...?

[Rafael]

I am not sure to understand correctly the question from Mickosh3, but I can say that the Zinc anods (marked A in the picture)are installed to protect the hull and bracket from corrosion as a sacrificial metal. The V or A brackets are intended to support the lateral shaft on a bearing cradle. They do not support the armor belt. The rear armor belt was installed in a recess on the frames in order to make it flush with the hull plating and reduce the disturbances on the water flow that otherwise would be created. I do not think this is something to do with antimagnetic device.

The photo of the Gneisenau after Operation Juno shows the degaussing cable but far away from the water level, not underwater as you despicted in your Bismarck Mickosh3. I am not sure that this device was really installed, but it will be very interesting if you could find a proof of that. On the other hand the model of the Tirpitz that Bernd show us in his pictures indicated a similar device in the stern but not all the way around the hull. I have never see such a "cable" before, but this is part of the fun, new discoveries every day or almost every day...!

Concerning the line marked as A in the picture I fully agree with Bernd, it is the end of the filling strake between the armor (170 mm thick on the tip) and the hull plating (watertight shell). A welding between the filler strake and the hull plating is shown in the photo. This line appears to be horizontal, but we don't know what is the incination of the wreck rigth now. Even if the wreck is horizontal, the welding in that area of the A brackets is almost horizontal, very difficult to notice the difference. Only the rear part of the 60 mm armor is curved up following the shape of the hull. In my opinion this armor edge is horizontal up to the frame 30.00 and then is curved up as long as you move to the stern.

Kind regards.

Rafael

[109]

OK, I now understand my confusion and what lead me to it:

1. Mikosch�s picture of the hull with his MES and
2. Wrong memory of a Bismarck photo. I attached it below. There you can see the end of the armor support structure marked with white arrows and an A.

Mikosh marked the MES with an A in his wreck picture, he is correct with this!

[Mickosh3]

Hi, everybody!

Thank you, Bernd, This is very new picture for me. It was made before the launching, so the MES system wasn't mounted yet.

Let me to explain, what were the reasons for my MES-improvisation:
I knew only:
-that MES-cable passed along the lower edge of the armour belt:
-that the cable was protected with C-shaped metal profiles (from antimagnetic metal, I belive)
-that the cable was seen by members of Cameron expedition:
-that the physical model of the system is a coil:
-that, very probably, pictures from the drydock were corrected by censors (it explains, why we don't see the cable and S-transmitters).

The light line A from my picture was more fit for the cable:
- It is not a steel:
-It passes beside the rudders (the rudders's steel can damage the magnet fields!)

So, I calculated the cable size with comparision with B-size (I got A=80 mm) and inbuilded the 0,4 wire in my 1/200 hull.

If I am wrong, please, correct me.

With best regards
Mickosh3

[Rafael]

Hi, Mickosh3 and Bernd!

Looking at Bernd's picture in his last post I realised that the area of the V struts is about 5 m towards the stern from the end of the main armor belt (Frame 32) for which the scketch of the Panzerst�tsblech is valid. The area of the V strut is in the vecinity of the frame 27.00 so, how the end of armor support could reach this area if there is no armor to support ? Isn't a simple end hull plating ? Bernd could you please clarify?

On the other hand, in Mickosh3 wreck picture there is a line just over the V strut and if we compare both pictures we could conclude that this line is the top of a rectangular plate to whom is welded the outside arm of the v-strut. If it is the position of the MES I would agree, but this line in the wreck picture can not be a 80 mm cable. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Rafael

[Mickosh3]

Hi, Rafael!

there is some additional info about the position of the MES (and the size of the cable - but from Gneisenau!):

[109]

[quote="Mickosh3"]Hi, Rafael!

there is some additional info about the position of the MES (and the size of the cable - but from Gneisenau!):

quote]

Mikosh, the MES is the line above sea level in that photo!

Bye,

Bernd.

[109]

Hi, Mickosh3 and Bernd!

Looking at Bernd's picture in his last post I realised that the area of the V struts is about 5 m towards the stern from the end of the main armor belt (Frame 32) for which the scketch of the Panzerst�tsblech is valid. The area of the V strut is in the vecinity of the frame 27.00 so, how the end of armor support could reach this area if there is no armor to support ? Isn't a simple end hull plating ? Bernd could you please clarify?

A in the Bundesarchiv, Bild 193-36-3-18A / CC-BY-SA is the beginning of the armor spupport in front of frame 32. I attached a drawing of it.

On the other hand, in Mickosh3 wreck picture there is a line just over the V strut and if we compare both pictures we could conclude that this line is the top of a rectangular plate to whom is welded the outside arm of the v-strut. If it is the position of the MES I would agree, but this line in the wreck picture can not be a 80 mm cable. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Rafael

[Mickosh3]

Hi, everybody!

Yes, no doubts about the support of the main armour belt - and the fine drawing proves it.
The only question is still dark: what means the light metal (line A on Bismarc wreck)? Is it just a protection from a corrosion? But the position is strange; also it is very expensive (why a line? Why not a plates?)

About Gneisenau : I have no ideas about the thick line above a water. Physically it is more than strange for MES. I don't imagin how can it work...
The only (foolish) explanation: it is something like a "wave-breaker"

With best regards,
Mickosh3 (Anatoly)

[Rafael]

Hello!

Sorry guys but main armor finish at frame 32.00 so at 27.00 there is no armor to support. The drawing does not show that the support (horizontal plate) extent to the frame 27. Only the filler strake goes beyond the frame 32 at about frame 27. Ah.. probably you call armor support to the whole thing, filler strake and horizontal support... In this case I fully agree. I call it filler strake because those plates covers the space between the lower end of the 320 mm armor (actually 170 mm on the edge) and the watertight hull plating, mark A in Bernd's scketch.

By the way Bernd, as far as i know the armor plates were screwed over a 50 or 60 mm teak wood before to be welded together, if this famous filler strake is not watertight, the foundation of the armor would be damaged by the salt water. It is not the same to be completely submerged at 5000 m depth than to be subjected to a variation from a wet, humid, and dry condition. Anyway they had to weld that filler strake, so why not make it watertight and protect the teak wood at the same time ? Otherwise how they protect it ? Even if the wood would rest undamage it would absorve salt water and will corrode the armor from inside.

Anatoly, good to know your name... the line you mentionned is deeper then the red painted hull plating, it can not be a cable. In my opinion it should be the border of the hull plating. As I've said before it is the border of a rectangular or almost rectangular plate to whom the outside leg of the V-strut is welded . The light color of the line could be an effect of light on the darkness of the abyss where the Bismarck is Today.

Regarding the Gneisenau picture, a magnificent one indeed; somewhere I've read that it is a degaussing cable (MES ?), to small for a wave-breaker in that area, but the line you initially said is the MES, is for me a big question mark ? Bernd show us in his reconstruction of the Bismarck bow that there is a plate thicker than the rest of the hull plating. It is clarily visible in the pictures of Tirpitz launching. Could be the same in the case of Scharhorst class.

Bye for now.

Rafael

[Mickosh3]

Hi, Pafael!
I read your post with big interest, but�but I still don�t agree!
Let me to argue with you a little bit.
About filler strake (the Light line on the wreck): I think, there no a chance to make a waterproof protection by the way. And for what? The corrosion needs for thousand years to eat the 80 mm hardened steel (the stern armor I mean).What concerning the hull steel (20mm) under the armor, it is protected well enough by wood and, I am sure, a special resin�
If you remember the Bernd�s post from 14.01.2012 (I mean the picture before the launching), you can see two rows of riveting . It is the lower edge of stern armor ! The main armor belt and the stern armor belt had the same lower edge - but it is also position of MES (according with description) �and it is also the position of the light line!
For me it means: the light line is not an optical illusion � it is the MES's protector from a non-magnetic (and anticorrosion ) metal, very probably, Zn
Why the MES cable was so deep in a water? For additional protection! A cable along the main deck (for example � Hood , Yamato) can be damaged even by a light shell � and extremely hard to fix it in a sea. If a cable is deep in the water, it will be damaged only in fatal situation�
There also is a picture the Bismarck in the dry dock (I just to find it). Please, pay attention on a line along the hull (showed by arrows)- especially on left side (port side) . It is not a water�s track, it is not a welding line - I am almost sure, it is a cable!




And about the Gneisenau�s thick line above the water. The huge fountains of water drops were a trouble of Sharnhost-class. So, there were lots of modernizations to improve it. The ships were equipped with �atlantic� for-stems: the anchors came up, to main deck: wave �breakers and so on� I think , the thick line is a stage of the �fountain battle� (the line was absent, when the ship was commissioned).
Yes, Bernd shows, that one steel sheet is thicker: but the difference is 6 mm! Also it is not a welding line (too thick!)

So, I am sure , that MES cable on my hull is OK.

Sorry for the long post

With best regards
Anatoly

[109]

Hi,

a quick response ...

Armor plating was not welded with the exception of the 35mm plating in the bow and stern. Main armor belt was bolted to the hull with Panzerbolzen, a threaded bolt with a predetermined breaking point outside of the plate. It was backend with wood because these thick armor plates had rather large tolerances. To ensure a force and tight fit of the plating to the hull a wooden layer was used behind the plating. This was adjusted and shaped to fit the rear face of the plates. Sunk keys were used in the rebates to achieve a force and tight fit of the belt and citadell armor. The wood was conserved with a black sealing as can be seen in contempory photos.

Bow and stern armor was riveted with rivet screws as can be seen in the photos.

Yes, that�s the MES in your photo of the docked Bismarck.