Projects

Discussion in 'North Atlantic Treaty Combat Fleet' started by slow_and_ugly, Mar 14, 2010.

  1. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    Hi,
    Just want to drop a line to relate the projects I am working on (just so everyone knows I am still here)
    USS Detroit -- I started work on a USS Omaha class light cruiser. The (wooden) hull is coming along well. I started sanding it this evening. It is certainly no work of art, but I think it can be made into a functioning cruiser. The trickiest part is the stern -- I have less than .5 inch to install the rudder, so it may prove to be an insurmountable problem. In any event the internals will be tight.
    Hawkins Class -- I cut the wood and started assembly, but stopped because things weren't going together very well. I think I know what to do , but it is definitely on the back burner for now.
    Nagato -- John gave me Tommy's old Nagato -- I planned to make a new hull for it and use the existing superstructure. However, my set of plans was grossly inaccurate (to be fair, it was being used as an example on how to interpret hull lines and not as a plan). I looked to see if it was possible to rebuild the hull, but there is simply no way. I have ordered a new set of plans. In the meantime, it sits sad and forlorn in the garage.
    IJN Takao -- I built this last winter, but stopped short of turning it into a combat model. I have tentative plans to finish it as a combat model. This is also a wooden hull. It just needs turrets, masts, and paint (and guns). The biggest hurtle here wll be to convince my 5 year old to let me use it.
    HMS Indefatigable -- cut out and the prop shafts in, Started the water channeling. Wating for good weather to install the deck.
    HMS Renown -- in limbo. The hull is cut out and the prop shafts are in. I need to reinforce the stringers before I proceed and I can't start any FG work until the summer when the everyone else will be away. (This is the ship that convinced me that my FG work sucked). I have misplaced my plan booklet, so I can't do the superstructure until I find it.
    Tirpitz -- still 99.9% done. Awaiting AA guns and another test drive.
    Konig -- Mostly ready, but I won't fight it under treaty anymore. It is simply too slow and is unmanagable in anything more than the tiniest of breezes.
    My biggest problem has been that with the winter parking ban I have to keep the car in the garage, so I have no workspace. What I can do is use the computer to scan and print plans, so I simply keep starting new projects. Now that the parking is back, the garage is empty and I can start work again and maybe actually finsh something.
    I plan to make an order for a 3.5 oz tank and some guns and fittings a little later in the year.
     
  2. Bob Pottle

    Bob Pottle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Posts:
    1,947
    Location:
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Hi Rob,
    You've been busy despite lack of access to the garage and inability to fiberglass. I can sympathize with the latter which has delayed 4 of my projects. I'll start glassing on the roofed front porch as soon as it's warm enough to leave stuff outside overnight to cure.
    Rodney and Vanguard both need their fiberglass decks glassed to their hulls and I need to make the fiberglass quarterdeck for Ibuki (Treaty light carrier) and all decks for the Krasni Krim (IRCWCC light cruiser). KK has priority because I might be able to attend NATS this year and want to try her with bow quad spurt guns as a base defence ship in Campaign Lite. (The main reason I decided to build the ship.)
    The only problem is my high school class's first reunion since graduation 40 years ago is being held in NB on July 10. There's potential difficulty getting enough time off work to attend the reunion and then NATS the next week.
    I'm surprised by Koenig's poor handling. Is she under weight and presenting more hull to the wind, or isn't there enough water flowing over the rudder to stear well? I doubt it's the latter because HMS Minotaur has the same speed under Treaty rules and still turned as tightly as at IRCWCC speed, though much more slowly. Maybe the K's rudder is smaller than allowed.
    I'm not surprised Tommy's original Nagato was unsalvagable. It was unrepairable when he bought it from"Crapworks" >10 years ago, due to hull rot. That's why he bought the fiberglass Nagato hull.
    HMS Indefatigable should be a great performer.
    I started the frames for a Hawkins Class plug about 10 years ago but no one was interested in the hulls so it was scrapped. For a British heavy cruiser you can't beat a Kent or Dorseshire Class. They're bigger targets but much more survivable due to higher hull sides and much greater reserve buoyancy (the same applies to the Spanish Canarias Class).
    What's happening with the HMS Eagle project?
    Bob
     
  3. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    Konig turns okay --- it's simply too slow -- in a breeze it can't make any headway and the wind can keep the bow from coming around. Maybe I've got it too slow it's absolutely glacial.

    I plan on using the Tirpitz as my Treaty ship.

    Yes, the Kent is great. I really regret getting rid of the Canberra.

    The Eagle is still in the wings. I bought some 1:144 swordfish to put on the deck. I almost started it, but the bulges will make it almost impossible to sheet.
     
  4. Bob Pottle

    Bob Pottle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Posts:
    1,947
    Location:
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Are the bulges on Eagle the stepped type as on the QE Class and Renown? I'll need to figure out how to sheet bulges like that in the near future.
    Bob
     
  5. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    I tried to put it into words, but as they say.......
    [​IMG]
     
  6. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    Updates:
    I am afraid I will have to abondon the Detroit, at least as a combat model. I installed the prop shafts over the weekend. It was much more difficult than I expected. They are in, but intrude too far into the interior. There won't be enough space for all the stuff that has to go in. I think it would be possible, just not with the hull as I have done it.
    The Hawkins is dead. Bad planning. Bad cutting. Bad job.
    I am serously considering junking my Renown too. The FG hull is simply too shoddy.
    Nagato is still a go. Once I receive my plan.
    Indefatigable is still a go.
     
  7. djranier

    djranier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Posts:
    1,756
    What size props did you setup the Detroit with? Looking at the plans I was wondering about the same issue. BC sells some 7/8 props that might work, allowing the stuffing tubes to be pulled closer to the hull, maybe.
     
  8. mike5334

    mike5334 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Posts:
    1,877
    Location:
    Mississippi
    7/8" or 1" should be good. Maybe even 1 1/4". I'll know better after the IRC Spring Regional ... just repropped and reset the shafts in the Gloire to use 1 1/4" low pitch props. If it is still fast with the same battery combo as before, then we'll know to use a smaller prop with the Omahas. The Gloire and Omaha are rather close in size and weight.
     
  9. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    Hi,
    Thanks for the input. I've been looking at the plans and I think I can do it if I change my approach a little.
    So I am going to try again. I might even take pictures.
     
  10. froggyfrenchman

    froggyfrenchman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Posts:
    3,358
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    After reading through some of the other threads here, it has occurred to me that the speeds of the ships (especially the ships at the lower end of the speed
    chart) comes up quite often. And in some cases the speeds are seen as too slow.
    After giving it some thought, I have come to the conclusion, that the main difference between the folks battling to Treaty up in Canada, and the folks down
    here in the states, is that the folks up north have no big-gunners. Or at least it seems that way.
    When the speed chart was originally laid out, the idea was to come up with a spread of speeds that would be somewhere in between fast-gun, and big-gun.
    The reason being that the fast-gunners thought big-gun speeds were too slow. And the big-gunners thought that the fast-gun speeds were too fast.
    It might be worth considering either raising the minimum warship speed, or changing the speed chart all together.
    Just posting my thoughts on the matter.
    It might be worth starting a new thread.
    Mikey
     
  11. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    I think the real difference is what we sail on. We usually are on fairly large lakes which exposes the ships to wind and choppy water whenever the weather is anything but perfect. This really throws the ships around and makes it hard make way.
     
  12. Bob Pottle

    Bob Pottle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Posts:
    1,947
    Location:
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Rob,
    I see you've started a second Detroit hull but is it possible to remove the too long prop shafts in the first hull and replace them with shorter ones? A Detroit would be nice to see on the water with my Krasni Krim, which should be finished by July. One of the Detroit/Omaha Class was transferred to Soviet service so we could have a Russian CL squadron.
    Bob
     
  13. slow_and_ugly

    slow_and_ugly Active Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    232
    Hi Bob,
    I don't think it is practical. The prop shafts are long because I had already installed the water channeling and the shafts had to come up through a thick deck. I had planned to simply drill the holes but I couldn't get any more than a shallow angle so I had to bring the shafts forward just to clear the bottom of the boat. I ended up cutting long slots and then filling with resin. I did a real butcher job. I feel much better about the new one I am doing.

    Space will be tight -- and I am not sure I can get the rudder working because it is so very very narrow at the stern. I might bring the rudder post forward a little bit from scale.
     
  14. Bob Pottle

    Bob Pottle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Posts:
    1,947
    Location:
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Rob,
    You could try what I did for the bow rudder on British monitor HMS Erebus. The bow was so narrow I had to install a gear train to operate the rudder from further aft. Three posts made of brass tubing were installed, the furthest forward being the bow rudder's shaft tube and the other two holding brass shafts, all shafts having meshing aluminum gear wheels (from R/C car parts). The rudder arm was on the 3rd post aft where there was enough room for full rudder arm movement.
    Alternatively I think Battlers Connection sells a toothed belt and gear system for rudder shaft operation.
    Bob