I am cleaning up a set of plans for the famous predreadnought Mikasa, flagship of the Japanese fleet at the battle of Tsushima Strait. I want to post these plans to the free plans section of the website, but I have discovered a few discrepancies in the drawings. To resolve these differences, I am looking for several specific dimensions for me to double-check. If anyone has a sourcebook, or an accurate set of plans, I would like to know: 1) length between perpendiculars 3) depth of the tip of the ram bow, as measured from the waterline 4) freeboard (height from waterline to main deck) as measured amidships, bow, and stern 5) height of the funnels, as measured from the main deck 6) height of the masts, from either waterline or main deck I would like to post these plans when they're complete, but I cannot in good conscience upload them while they contain critical errors.
I am guessing you checked the usual sources. Conway's, etc. If you can find an equivalent White era British predread, I have a copy of the 1922 report from the Institute of Naval Architects which has a table including a lot of that information for the Majestic - Dreadnought class ships. (Swiftsure and Triumph not included)
Right now I'm at school, cut off from my collection of sourcebooks That's a great idea, though. Mikasa was based on the Majestic class predread, which should make a good comparison. I should check if I've got plans for the Majestic in my library.
Here is what I have been able to pull together Mikasa Length 414’ wl; 3(4)21’ oa; 400’ pp Beam 76’ Draught 27’2” Disp. 15179 (f), 15140 (n) source Jentschura-Warships of the IJN 1869-1945 Mikasa Length 415’ wl; 432’ oa Beam 76’ Draught 27’ Disp. 15179 (f), 15140 (n) source Conways All the Worlds Fighting Ships 1860-1905 Majestic Length 390’ pp; 421 oa Breadth 75’ Draught (mean) 27’6” Freeboard: foreward 25’; minimum 16’9”; aft 18’6” Height of guns above load waterline 27’ fwd; 23’ aft Disp. 14,900 Formidable (best match laid down the same year as Mikasa) Length 400’ pp; 432’ oa Breadth 75’ Draught (mean) 26’9” Freeboard: foreward 23’; minimum 16’9”; aft 18’ Height of guns above load waterline 25’ fwd; 23’ aft Disp. 15,000 source Transactions of the Institute of Naval Architects 1922 edition
Thanks, Anachronous. I am running your numbers through a scale converter and comparing to the plans. I also dug up a few other line drawings of the Mikasa for comparison.
OK, I think I've identified all the issues. The side profile on my plans has a number of inaccuracies. Specifically, it is approximately 1/4" deeper than scale, it has approximately 1/8" too much freeboard, and the bow and stern slope upwards too much. In addition, a number of components on the front half of the ship, including the smokestacks, mainmast, and several 3" and 6" guns, have been shifted horizontally by about 1/4". Because of the incorrect depth, the rudder is slightly oversized, and the props are shown in slightly incorrect positions. The only other error I have detected is that rib #2 is too tall by about 1/4". Everything else on the plans is correct, including the ribs, top profile, and superstructure levels. Combined with my additional drawings, I now have enough information to construct a highly detailed, true-scale model of the battleship Mikasa. There's only one problem. I don't want to construct the Mikasa yet, I want to post the plans on the free plans database. And I have neither the tools nor the time to correct every mistake on the plans before posting them. So what do I do? Should I post the plans, extra drawings, comparisons, etc. along with a list of the issues to watch out for? Should I post the plans, but include additional drawings showing the correct bow and stern profiles (with waterline) and the corrected rib #2? Or should I simply post the plans and say good luck?
I would say post the plans and a list of errors and corrections. Especially if you don't have time to draw out the corrected versions. Call them the beta test version. Or maybe alpha.
I was reading Brassey's from 1900 the other day and their comment on Mikasa was that she was so like the Formidable that White could have designed her.
Hmmm... That makes me wonder... is the Formidable within 5% of the Mikasa? I wonder if the hulls are interchangeable.
Without doing any calculations I would think so. Mikasa has a larger 6" battery and the turret shape is different. Length varies depending on sources. One gives both the same overall length. They other says 10' shorter. Mikasa is beamier by 1 foot and draws between 3" and 15" more water, depending on the sources again, which varied.
Hello, scratch building Mikasa (1/100) is also one of my (multiple) projects but I couldn't find a detailled plan. The one I've bought on internet (Taubman) was quite poor. The solution may be to buy the Tamiya 1/350 model and enlarge it. I've also found a cross section plan on a Russian site but I don't know the distance between the verticals (and I'm sure there are not evenly distributed at both ends). What is your main source to build your plans ? I have mainly the booklet from "Fune no kakaku kan", a 3D CG reconstitution book of the Tushima battle (both in Japanese, not a problem for me) and the documents found on the Russian site.
