Design Study #8

[lancer525]

Originally Posted by shrike

1JUL89, Long Beach, Pier D Link and Link (about 80% down, just before Desert Shield)

That was right after I entered Naval service as a brand new Ensign. Interesting that I never knew about this. Of course, I served mostly on the East coast and I've never been a fan of Cher. Interesting, nonetheless...

[redhorse]

You did a pretty good job camouflaging this one naming it Design Study #8 and all! Well, I found it anyhow and I'll be following along with great interest! Everything is very impressive so far.

Where did you order your 1/200 figures from? I've tried paper figures and I'm really not satisfied with the blocky look to them...

[SJPONeill]

Please, please, please stick with the 4 x 4 18" version - that is just so way cool and if you have the slightest scribble on the back of a napkin to support it, then that is enough for me! I have the Nichimo Yamato in 1/200 in that other modelling medium and one of your Montanas would be great to go alongside it.

Preiser in Germany do 1/200 figures for model railroading - you have to shop around as some places charge astronomical process for them i.e. I have seen them for $2+ PER FIGURE!!

[lancer525]

Red Horse, SJP:
Thanks guys... At this point I need all the encouragment I can get. I got home from my trip to the Caribbean last night, only to discover that the files where I had saved my spine and frames drawings were corrupt, so I have to redraw them all over again. Tedious, but it has to be done if I am going to continue. Rats.

The 1/200 figures I am getting are indeed from Preiser. I found a huge set of 190 figures for around $60 at "Antics" a British modelling shop on the net.

Preiser 1/200 Box of 190 Architectural Figurines (80990) | Antics Online

That works out to about $0.32 per figure I think, if my math and currency conversion are right.

Maurice:
If you don't like what I'm doing with this model, the you can either design the damn thing yourself, or you can not comment on it.

When were you in the U. S. Navy? I served from 1988 to 1997, and part of that time was at the former Navy & Marine Corps Intelligence Training Center, where we saw all kinds of damned interesting things. I have lots of friends who still wear the blue suit, and if you care to look as deeply as I have (not everything is on the internet) you'll find the same things I found. Some things still have low-level classification. Even the plans for the SS United States still carry classification, and that ship has been laid up for over 30 years.

So, unless you have the same information, interest, motivation, and desire that I have, you don't get to "allow" me to do what I want with it. I stated from the beginning that since the class was never built, that I would take all the license with it I wanted to take.

It is precisely this kind of attitude that kept me from announcing this project for so long. I used to belong to a resin/plastics/scratchbuilding forum years ago, and everyone on it was like this. "Oh, far be it from me to criticize but..." and then do NOTHING but criticize. I am not on this forum for criticism. I am on it for support and encouragement. I didn't ask for your opinions on whether or not the configurations I may choose to model are either appropriate or accurate. Therefore, since I am the one who is designing this, and you aren't, then I'll take whatever artistic license or designers prerogative I damn well choose to take. If you don't like it, then you design one.

You can now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

[Bomarc]

Well, I think this is great undertaking Lancer, and wish you "fair winds and following seas".

About 12 years ago, when I was still in the Naval reserves, I drilled with a unit at Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare Center in Virginia. They were (still are?) the proving grounds for all the Navy's guns, firing them downrange into the Potomac river. When I was there, they had the prototype 18" gun lying around amongst other discarded old guns.

I did a Google Earth look-up, and it appears it's still there, if my memory is any good (red arrow):



You can see the firing line with the land based turrets and such to the right, and the rest of the old guns lying around in the upper part of the image.

Mike

[B-Manic]

Alright guys there is no need for sarcasm or hostility. Lets stick to modeling here.

This should be an interesting thread because of the subject, not in spite of it. I look forward to seeing more of the design process and expect there will be much helpful and speculative banter.

cheers
~Douglas

[Wyvern]

The design certainly would've produced a mean battleship!

And your test frame looks great to my eye, Lancer.

Wyvern

[Barry]

Question do you have a kit for an Iowa class ship ?

If you have use that keel as a starting point for the shapes for the bow and stern plates the plates in the middle are straightforward anyway as the ship seems to have no torpedo bulges. Cut the strips too long tack glue to hold them in place take a sharp knife and cut the things out and copy them. Remember you can't do the same with card as you can with steel i.e you can't belt it with a hammer so you will have to accept that perfection just is not there just go for the best possible look.

I would suggest you need some lengthwise ribs on the larger pieces to stop sag on the curve I think 2 inches is about the right distance between frames without that support.

As everybody seems to sand and paint the hull I gave up matching the frames precisely and overlapped the plates on the trailing edge. A quick sand and some paint works wonders. I used this method on Tarawa and Richelieu at the size you are talking about no one will notice.

Sorry about the I, I, I but give yourself a break

[lancer525]

Originally Posted by barry

Question do you have a kit for an Iowa class ship ?

Barry! I am so glad you dropped in. I was really hoping you'd make an appearance!

Yes, I do have an old Iowa, and I've used it for some of the profile, as well as for a few of the frames. There are some very subtle differences between the images I've seen of the proposed Montana hull, and the Iowa. The Montanas would have been slower than the Iowas because of their sheer bulk, but a few tricks were used to increase the speed by reducing hydrodynamic pressures and fairing of the hull in discrete areas. The Montanas definitely were not "Super Iowas", and they were fairly radical in hull design for the 1940s. Some of the features of the hull form are still used today on modern ships.

If you have use that keel as a starting point for the shapes for the bow and stern plates the plates in the middle are straightforward anyway as the ship seems to have no torpedo bulges.

I've seen one diagram that shows a weird cross section of the hull where there was a "groove" just below the waterline, partially for armor-belting, and partially to prevent adding an exterior bulge. When I get home from work, I'll see if I can't dig it up, scan it, and post it. Regardless of how accurate it is, I know straightaway that it is far beyond my skills to attempt to reproduce, so it won't be a part of this design.

Cut the strips too long tack glue to hold them in place take a sharp knife and cut the things out and copy them. Remember you can't do the same with card as you can with steel i.e you can't belt it with a hammer so you will have to accept that perfection just is not there just go for the best possible look.

Do we know each other? You've said something that makes me think you've known me all my life! One of the things one of my DIs said way back when, "Don't kill yourself trying to be perfect. Good enough is good enough, and perfection is almost always a pain in the ass and usually isn't worth the trouble. It isn't a destination, it's a road." I've tried to live by that as much as possible since. I think it made me a better officer.

Anyway, I've seen lots of people on this (and other) forums, who have expressed displeasure at the poor quality of some models. I am neither the best, nor the most experienced designer, but by golly, I am going to try to produce as easy-to-build set of plans as I can. I'm not going to beat myself to death over it, but I am going to try to do my best.

I would suggest you need some lengthwise ribs on the larger pieces to stop sag on the curve I think 2 inches is about the right distance between frames without that support.

I was actually thinking the same thing myself. Something like an additional stringer to go in between the frames at the longer stations. I will probably end up putting more frames in, because it will be easier in the long run, I think. Problem is, at almost 60 inches, that would effectively double the frames. Lots of cutting.

As everybody seems to sand and paint the hull I gave up matching the frames precisely and overlapped the plates on the trailing edge. A quick sand and some paint works wonders. I used this method on Tarawa and Richelieu at the size you are talking about no one will notice.

I have no experience with sanding paper that didn't produce a really ugly "fuzz" effect. I may suggest to future builders to use foamboard as the frames, and adjust the stringers accordingly, or to use "overlap" plates along the outside edges of the frames (but inside the plating) to give something for the hull plates to "grab" without trying to line up an edge precisely half the thickness of a 1mm sheet of artboard. I wish I could draw a diagram showing what I am talking about, but I'm having to redraw all the longerons and stringers because my files got corrupted somehow, and it would be too doggone much drawing! :D

Sorry about the I, I, I but give yourself a break

Barry, you're one of the most respected members of the shipbuilding community here. Do not apologize for stating your ideas, opinions, or comments. I welcome it, especially from guys like you. I promise you, I won't beat myself to death over this. But I will try to do a good job.

[Barry]

It would double the number to cut but they can then be 1 mm not 2mm provided that you strengthen any pointy bits with superglue . Tarawa has frames made from 160gsm + a cornflake packet but I just added scrap cardboard rectangles between the frames for strength. It does not have to be square even as long as it does not warp the frame. No one will ever see after the plates go on

barry

ps Maurice has a a very dry sense of humour but if you read between the lines he will teach you a hell of a lot. I learned half my tricks from him.