The Ship Model Forum

Imagination and ingenuity, wow. Well done, the props look really smart

Andrew

Great work Russ! Looking forward to watching your progress!

Cheers!

Hi Russ Even the mundane of items can fullfill the needs of the modeller. Good lateral thinking .
Dave Wooley

i have two sets of plans and they do not show the armor belt.i made a rough templet out of paper from the pics i have ,but i am not sure if it is correct .i think the main belt at the bow and stern extends fore and aft a ways , not as high and much thinner plate.does this look right or is it wrong.if it is incorrect let me know.i am always open to criticism,i have thick skin,if it looks wonky to anyone let me know.i will make the belt out of styrene,it will have to be done in several layers as it curves over the bulge,and thick styrene will not bend in that short of radius.

Hi Russ I have sent you a PM .
Dave Wooley

everyboby has been very helpful on the armor belt.i think i am getting more confused the more pics and drawings i look at.there is no mention in print of the side armor reworked along with the other modifcations done in 1940-44.but some drawings of her in 1941 show the belt below the portholes ,and some others show it above the lower row,also some show the belt disappering into the bulge and others show it extending over it these images are what i mean.

well my friends,i have to make a decision on how to do the armor belt.i cannot tear of what is done it would destroy the planking.and i belive the belt goes above the lower row of portholes at a reduced thickness,and goes behind the bulge below.so i will add a thinner piece of styrene over the lower portholes,and fair the bottom edge of the belt to form to the hull below the bulge. when the wood is faired down it should look like it is part of the bulge,i hope . i have went over many pics and drawings of all the differant years none seem to agree with each other,when you find two differant pics showing the same thing you say thats it,do the work then find another pic or drawing showing it differant.this is what i am trying to aviod,but somhow it happens and then it is bite your nail time trying to adjust it .i am not going to look at any more bulge pics or drawings this is how it is going to be

Hi Russ Making a firm decision the only way ahead .Compile all the evidence , cross reference it and go with what is the best bet!!
Dave Wooley

Hi Russ,

just to support your (imho correct) decision - this photo of the original ship:



cheers,
Peter

thanks dave,peter.i think some of my problem was assuming all 3 ships had the same belt ,not true.

I agree with your choice.
Lutzow was different from Spee and Scheer by being lighter and I think less in beam while Spee didn't live long enough to be modified.
Armor was sloped to increase resistance to long range fire and any turn outward would defeat both the reason for the slope and purpose of the bulge.

Hi Russ,

you get a ticket for speeding in modeling..

Great work so far!

some more work on the armor belt,anchor openings,and port hole experiment.on nagato i used photo-etch port holes ,but was no that impressed with them.on s.c i will make my own ,here is a pic here showing a couple of options.i like the gromet but it is a little over size,the others are styrene tube.the gromets are easy to put in as they have a short shaft on them.i will keep looking for a smaller diameter.still scratching my head on weld lines.

Looking at the picture Guest posted I wonder if the plating around the lower row of air ports is actually armor? Or is it just an ordinary hull plating strake?

The armor belt probably didn't extend above the armored deck (usually not the main deck). So which deck had the thickest armor plate? That likely marks the top of the armor belt.

Also, armor was designed to be effective against enemy gunfire, and actually was of little use against torpedoes. It was an example of preparing to fight the previous war. The armor belts were mostly below the waterline only a short distance - enough that water would slow a round sufficiently that it would lose penetrating power. Torpedoes often hit the hull below the armor belt. The armor was angled to cause the round to ricochet or to break off the hard nose piece, preventing it from penetrating the armor.

The blisters were often added later when navies realized the danger of torpedoes. They may have extended around the armor belt, as shown in your drawing. The blister surface was to detonate torpedoes and the void between the blister surface and the interior hull served to absorb the force of torpedo detonation before it reached the main hull plating. It would do the same for a plunging projectile that bounced off the armor plate.

Here is a web site devoted to analysis of naval weapopns and armor:

http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/index_nathan.htm

There are discussions of the "best" battleship design, with descriptions of the armor. You might find something useful here.

hi DrPR, thanks for your coments.i am sure sheer was built with sloping armor and bulges,but when she had her refit in 1940-42 maybe thay added 50mm armor higher up above the 80mm belt.these drawings show this and so do a few others.but there is no writen referance to this i can find.

i have found proof that the thinner belt went above the lower port holes.heres the pic look at the right hand side it does not show much of it but it is there.

hello all,super bowl time ,go packers,i still miss bart starr and the old gang thaking a brake from the hull for a bit,still trying to fiqure out what do do about the 378 portholes.sheer has a lot of longated type port holes in the supersructure ,they are rectangle with a rounded top and bottom.i tried cutting them out with an exato knife but it was painfull and not good.drilling two holes and cutting the center out did not work good either to hard to keep the drill centered.then i remembered my leather punch,i put the right sized punch in and it made the top and bottom curve good, then a little cut with the exato knife and it came out fairly well.the thing one has to do is not work to close to the edge as the punch will deform the edge.best to lay things out and punch then trim the piece to size.

Hi Russ Amazing rate of progress . Good method used for elongating each window.
Dave Wooley

Hi Russ i agree Dave Wooley
your model is again a great model coming us.....
wonderfull job.. you are very fast in the buildings

Very nice work there Russ, well done!

Andrew