Waterline vs Full Hull

[shipbuild]

Unless you work in a shipyard how often do you see a ships underbody ? If you like the color of red or brown oxide paint then full underbody is your choice. These days I prefer a waterline hull.

[FRD]

I have a preference for water line models as well as it is easier to assemble and that is how the ship is usually seen, at, "eye-level" from the waterline up but that's just my personal preference, however, I did design the "Three Friends" model(s) that had both the full hull AND water line options, two models from the waterline up that shared a common, lower hull/stand so that when one was displayed with full hull, the other would be a waterline model.

[Hazooka]

Even the well detailed models lack the details on the underwater part.
All the inlets, outlets and plating are skipped.
No fun watching empty,flat/round, bent paper, with clear division lines and stepped roundness, trying to simulate a smooth shape of the hull.

[Lex]

Originally Posted by Hazooka

Even the well detailed models lack the details on the underwater part.
All the inlets, outlets and plating are skipped.
No fun watching empty,flat/round, bent paper, with clear division lines and stepped roundness, trying to simulate a smooth shape of the hull.

That is also one of my major complaints. I am not sure why the majority of ship models are missing these details.

[JohnMGD]

Because they are not researched enough before starting building them !

[Draco]

Originally Posted by shipbuild

Unless you work in a shipyard how often do you see a ships underbody ? If you like the color of red or brown oxide paint then full underbody is your choice. These days I prefer a waterline hull.

You can be right, but it's like saying that we must remove the landing gear of the planes because they are usually seen flying, or like removing the bomb bay doors in the bombers because they are allways closed. The lower hull is part of the ship.
In fact, I remember seen a diorama of a type VII where the only thing you can see is the sea surface and a periscope. Whe could replace all the submarine models with just periscope representations.

[Lex]

^ That. I am not so against waterline ships as I'm against waterline submarines, but rejecting full hull with a realism argument is stretching it. Waterlines are great, I enjoy them in dioramas, but full hull models also have a huge reason to exist at all.

[wireandpaper]

This is the beauty of this hobby, you may do it the way you like. In Mexico we say: there are many ways to deal with roaches. If you are not a purist you may do a hybrid model, paper on top, wood below, or use bulkheads and cover the. You may use traditional techniques or computer aided design, and you may scale the way you like. This is paper, the thickness of the paper is the limit! And you may detail it the way you want.

I use to like full hulls when I was addicted to pl...c, but since I recovered I prefer WL. The later are easier to design, store and compare.

So, if you want to make a full hull out of a waterline, it is possible but it would be a challenge on you. It is also possibly that you are very lucky and there is exactly the model you want in FH waiting for you.

[Dane]

Some likes vodka, some likes cogniac.... What do you disput about?..... :-)

[wireandpaper]

You are "Absolut" right, and some likes both!

ps: and some likes sticks for periscopes