Model Boat Mayhem - Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16   Go Down

Author Topic: IRON DUKE 1914  (Read 110361 times)

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #50 on: April 28, 2014, 07:09:43 PM »

And they look damn fine:O) I wonder how much a replica Warspite would cost to build? I'll pass the hat around.....:O)
Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

dreadnought72

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,771
  • Wood butcher with ten thumbs
  • Location: Airdrie, Scotland
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #51 on: April 28, 2014, 09:48:57 PM »

The original cost about 2.5 million in 1912.

It's difficult to estimate, but the best guess (using inflation calculators) would put a modern rebuild between 250 million and 2 billion. And possibly a lot more, since much of the engineering infrastructure has "changed".  %)

But - not wishing to hijack this thread too much! - which "one" do you go for?

  • The gorgeously minimalist "as built" one?
  • The added-bulge, trunked funnel, streamlined, and also gorgeous jazz-era one?
  • Or that floating block of flats?  ;D

Andy
Logged
Enjoying every minute sailing W9465 Mertensia

warspite

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,392
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #52 on: April 29, 2014, 09:05:43 AM »

No brainer really - the one that acrued the most honors  :-))
Logged
Operational vessels - 1/72 LCMIII, 1/180 Royal Soveriegn
Non Operational - 1/72 Corvette, 1/72 E-Boat, 1/72 vosper mtb
incomplete, tug, cardboard castle class, got the new job

Geoff

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 613
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #53 on: April 29, 2014, 09:19:03 AM »

version one!
Logged

warspite

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,392
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #54 on: April 29, 2014, 10:11:00 AM »

Me personally would go for version 3  O0 - to me it looks more imposing, but from a modellers point of view, version 1 is more of a challenge. but this isn't about QE's but the iron duke.
Logged
Operational vessels - 1/72 LCMIII, 1/180 Royal Soveriegn
Non Operational - 1/72 Corvette, 1/72 E-Boat, 1/72 vosper mtb
incomplete, tug, cardboard castle class, got the new job

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #55 on: April 29, 2014, 08:13:34 PM »

A damn fine battleship. I am looking forward to the completed model. There was a model of Benbow on Ebay a while back that caught my eye but the detail and shape of components was irregular.
Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

warspite

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,392
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #56 on: April 30, 2014, 09:12:53 AM »

AAHH yes - but version 1 and I believe version 2 were battleships, version 3 was then just a battle cruiser, obviously she was demoted in status with her sisters - unfairly I might argue, she looked a lot better than the vessel to her rear.
 
 
Logged
Operational vessels - 1/72 LCMIII, 1/180 Royal Soveriegn
Non Operational - 1/72 Corvette, 1/72 E-Boat, 1/72 vosper mtb
incomplete, tug, cardboard castle class, got the new job

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #57 on: April 30, 2014, 09:53:32 PM »

Yes, The QEs were the last properly designed battleships. The Royal Sovereigns were the first class to be designed by limitation. IMHO, the Royal Sovereigns should have been ships 6-10 of the QE class if not 6-12 if the last two had not been cancelled due to wartime construction constraints.

Anyhow, whatever, this should be the Iron Duke thread and we ought to start a new thread in the chat section on our love and devotion to the 'eight legger'!!!!
Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

Geoff

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 613
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #58 on: May 01, 2014, 08:42:20 AM »

The "R" class were designed to stand in the line and slug it out hence their lower speed and better protection. As the battlefleet speed was 21 knots they did not need to be significantly faster that the QE's. Their 15" guns were a very powefull addition to the battlefleetr firepower.
 
Generally British battleships were less well protected than their German counterparts but they carried heavier armament so the heavier protection on the German ships was not the advantage this would seem. However the British ships were let down bu their poor shells and dodgy cordite, particularly the Battlecrusiers who stored cordite in open spaces!
 
Okay, still little progreess with ID other than fibreglassing the hull outside and lots of sanding. Next step is to fit the bilge keels and correct the bow flare a bit then start on the plating!.
 
More to follow in due course
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
Logged

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #59 on: May 01, 2014, 08:43:14 PM »

Typical eh! Our superior guns let down by their shells. I was swayed by the probable biased opinions regarding the fear of an oil shortage when the R's were being drawn up and can see how as demonstrated at Jutland how having Royal Oak and Revenge in the battle line, the speed they had was practical.


Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

raflaunches

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,291
  • The Penguins are coming!!!
  • Location: Back in the UK, Kettering, Northants
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #60 on: May 01, 2014, 10:04:34 PM »

You've got to remember that the QE class were designed completely different to any preceding class like the Dukes and the succeeding R class. They were the prototype vessels to carry the 15in guns, use oil fuel as main fuel supply and were designed to take on any battleship then afloat. They were the original fast battleships. Their action at Jutland proved their superiority over other battleships, they held the entire German high seas fleet at bay whilst the grand Fleet organised itself into battle line, not bad considering that the most damaged (Warspite)  was only ordered back to Rosyth after her steering failed spectacularly at the heat of battle. They took the most punishment of all British battleships at Jutland, Warspite receiving 11 heavy shell hits and 18 lighter shell hits.


However in WW2 the shell and cordite problem was reversed, the German shells being inferior to the British ones, the Royal Navy learnt a lot from Jutland.
Logged
Nick B

Help! The penguins have stolen my sanity, and my hot water bottle!

Illegitimi non carborundum!

dodes

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 573
  • Location: Hampshire
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #61 on: May 03, 2014, 09:07:07 PM »

I watched a programme on the TV a while back which looked into why the battle cruisers at Jutland went up so spectacularly, turns out the Admirals requested the increase of ammunition be increased by 50%. The shells were no problem to stow but the Cordite bags were a different proposition. They had bags stowed around the turrets inside and the alleyways to the mag and the anti flash doors were locked back and on the Warrior class they believe some stowed on the open deck, all because the Admirals believed in a fast rate of fire over accuracy. As to the QE 15" shells they definitely had a design problem, the armour piercing shells burst without penetrating at Jutland and earlier shelling Turkish positions several 15" shells proved to be duds. 
Logged

Geoff

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 613
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #62 on: May 13, 2014, 01:40:46 PM »

As an add on, not all British shells were duds there were a good number of German turrets and barbettes penetrated and serious ammunition fires but no flash back to the magazines. It is interesting to note ID scored at least 7 hits on Koenig at Jutland one of which hit the armoured shelf below the waterline (half in the armour) and penetrated into a 6" magazine and started a fire! The fire was only put out by sea water flowing through the hole otherwidse Koeing could very well have been lost.
 
I think the problem with cordite stowage was more prevalent in the Battlecrusiers than the Battleships as they were chasing higher rates of fire. From my readings there is also a deep suspicion the British cordite was very volatile and it was a problem never really cured - Hood, Vanguard, Bulwark, Natal, Barham for example.
 
I have been enthused again to start work on Iron Duke as I have been refurbishing my Pre Dreadnougts (Canopus and Lord Nelson) with a view to sailing them at Wicksteed later this month. I was surprised at how long it has taken but I guess refitting a battleship even at 1/96 scale does take time!
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
Logged

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #63 on: May 13, 2014, 08:02:07 PM »

Detailing seems to take 3/5ths of the time a model takes to complete as there is mch duplication and logisitcal bottlenecks as these parts are obtained in batches or made by hand.

Good luck on your progress.
Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

dodes

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 573
  • Location: Hampshire
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #64 on: May 16, 2014, 08:08:49 PM »

Hi Geof, the cordite stowage was a major reason for the Battle Cruiser failures and the Warrior class, because they were made to stow 50% etc ammo above their designed amount which meant finding unsuitable stowage areas, but the 15" gun then where firing Lyddite shells which where observed to disintegrate on hitting. But apart from that the Q E class where superb vessels and ahead of their time in many respects, also I believe the super dreadnoughts mounting the 13.5" guns where beautiful vessels and to a certain extent under rated. 
Logged

dodes

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 573
  • Location: Hampshire
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #65 on: May 18, 2014, 01:59:08 PM »

Found this pic of the old girl in a floating dry dock in a very old book of mine, photo is dated 1933, thought it may be of interest to you.
Logged

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #66 on: May 18, 2014, 04:17:46 PM »

There is something about Floating docks that I like. I think it is their sheer utilitarian look. They have not an ounce of frippary about them.

Has anyone built a model of a floating dock?
Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

warspite

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,392
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #67 on: May 18, 2014, 10:08:15 PM »

quick get away from this before the sternwalk topic raises its head again %) %) , oops too late
Logged
Operational vessels - 1/72 LCMIII, 1/180 Royal Soveriegn
Non Operational - 1/72 Corvette, 1/72 E-Boat, 1/72 vosper mtb
incomplete, tug, cardboard castle class, got the new job

ballastanksian

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,356
  • Model Boat Mayhem inspires me!
  • Location: Crewkerne
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #68 on: May 19, 2014, 09:34:41 PM »

As in wether to add them to one's model or not?
Logged
Pond weed is your enemy

Geoff

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 613
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #69 on: August 14, 2014, 01:59:47 PM »

Okay, progress has been made on ID. The interior has been fibreglassed and the exterior sanded further with the brass bilge keels added and the final resin coat applied to the exterior which has just undergone first sanding.
 
Pictures to follow soon!
 
I plan to use plastic card for the armour and plating but am puzzling over the size of the armour plates and have not been able to find any conclusive answers. In terms of depth at 1/96 scale both the 8" and 9" strakes work out at almost exactly 1" deep and the 12" belt about 3/4". Given that the belt was in three distinct tiers I suspect that it was laid brick like fashion but does anybody know the length of each armour plate? My guess would be about 20 feet long each?
 
I intent only to model the out strakes and punch holes for portholes in the card. I have never been keen on drilling holes through a hull that is meant to be waterproof! I also think some models show portholes which are really too deep as they were really only the thickness of the plating. I believe on the hull the fixings were on the inside. My plan being to utilise smoked plastic shhet for the glazing after painting which has worked well on other models.
 
On another note I think I will plank the deck. Does anyone know a good source for accurate planks 1/8" x 1/16"? Not looking forwards to that part of the construction but I think it will lok better than any other way to show the deck. I've seen it done so if others can do it so can I!
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
Logged

dreadnought72

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,771
  • Wood butcher with ten thumbs
  • Location: Airdrie, Scotland
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #70 on: August 14, 2014, 04:23:54 PM »

I plan to use plastic card for the armour and plating but am puzzling over the size of the armour plates and have not been able to find any conclusive answers. In terms of depth at 1/96 scale both the 8" and 9" strakes work out at almost exactly 1" deep and the 12" belt about 3/4". Given that the belt was in three distinct tiers I suspect that it was laid brick like fashion but does anybody know the length of each armour plate? My guess would be about 20 feet long each?

Interesting question.

I don't know the answer. But a further question that could help answer it might be "how large could factories make armoured steel plates"?

Now, if you have the shell expansion diagram, it's likely to show the structural plate laps & layout behind the armour plate: not the armour plates themselves.

A quick whizz through Burt's Battleships of WW1 and his Battleships of the Grand Fleet do not, in any of the photos, clearly depict a vertical joint in the ships' armour belts. But then, we'd hope there wouldn't be anything like an obvious joint, else the system becomes fairly worthless.

It's clear that the "obvious" plate edges that show up in photos are the horizontal lines: that ~1" difference between a raised and sunken strake allows for a shadow at some angles. You'll get that for free by doing the plating the way you mention. It's rare to spot a vertical line between non-armoured plates in the same strake, so make that subtle. As for junctions in the armour plates, make it really subtle. As in invisible, would be my best guess.

Andy
Logged
Enjoying every minute sailing W9465 Mertensia

warspite

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,392
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #71 on: August 16, 2014, 07:48:58 PM »

Shapes of the plates would be unique, and opposite hand on the other side, I would assume due to the change in rake and curve as the ship constantly changes profile, some of the changes were at the discretion of the craftsman who rolled the complex curves to have it fit. correct me if I am wrong.
Logged
Operational vessels - 1/72 LCMIII, 1/180 Royal Soveriegn
Non Operational - 1/72 Corvette, 1/72 E-Boat, 1/72 vosper mtb
incomplete, tug, cardboard castle class, got the new job

Pondweed

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
  • Model Boat Mayhem Forum is Great!
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #72 on: August 17, 2014, 12:07:08 AM »

geoff
the outside of the armour was flat and any different thicknesses of armour would be taken up by the teak backing on the inside face. One photographs of Warspite, the only raised edges on the armour is the strip along the top and bottom of the belt that covers the join between the ships plate and the armour. Any intermediate horizontal joints within are 'keyed' so one holds the other in.

Warspites hull: there's a fair few photographs of Jutland damage about. I found daught marks on one and pasted it horizontally and got a plate of an uncannily accurate  25ft long. The Main belt on Lion was of 16ft long plates.

I don't have photos amidships

And as the below shows, they can be in a 'brick wall' pattern with the vertical joints offset.

Logged

derekwarner_decoy

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7,599
  • Location: Wollongong Australia
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #73 on: August 17, 2014, 12:10:55 AM »

Must agree warspite that the platers were certainly craftsman, however they worked to hull expansion plans that were created full size in the shipyard lofts [huge upstairs plan rooms]

The plates were sheared to the final profile prior to any rolling........an old Loftsman acquaintance [Whyalla Shipyard] suggested a 20 foot x 10 foot plate [for riveted hull construction] would be within +/- 1/8"  in length x breadth ......

Post rolling [in two planes] the plates were checked to wooden mockup frames to ensure correct alignment/accuracy prior to punching for riveting  :-)) ........

Like many forms of construction .....today we do not have the knowledge or skills to complete this work without the aid of computers >>:-( ........ Derek
Logged
Derek Warner

Honorary Secretary [Retired]
Illawarra Live Steamers Co-op
Australia
www.ils.org.au

Pondweed

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 132
  • Model Boat Mayhem Forum is Great!
Re: IRON DUKE 1914
« Reply #74 on: August 17, 2014, 12:53:11 AM »

Shapes of the plates would be unique, and opposite hand on the other side, I would assume due to the change in rake and curve as the ship constantly changes profile, some of the changes were at the discretion of the craftsman who rolled the complex curves to have it fit. correct me if I am wrong.

No discretion at all! both sides have to match, remember. :-)

It's even more complicated than I remember. Everything in a shipyard is done with jigs, moulds, forms and patterns. Datums are used and measurments ran from them along with string lines and levels.

Making the moulds for the armour plates starts with a datum line down the centre of the armour joint (this book was written when 2 tiers of armour was the norm) It is marked C in the diagam. The upper plate was measured upwards from the datum and the lower downwards.

Basically, the 'Surface Mould' gives the armour maker the perimiter size and shape of each plate, the 'Plan Mould' shows the curviture of the plate surfaceas looked from above while the 'Section Mould' provides the vertical shape.

Note the Surface Moulds are in a 'brick wall' pattern.

I KNOW that armor-plate making was an art-form and that the red hot plate both shrunk in size with any curves flattening slightly on cooling, thus plates were made slightly over-size and with slightly exagerated curves to allow for it.

HTHs

p.s. I've just read that each complete side of armour was erected in the workshop to test for fit prior to sending the plates to the shipyard. The minds boggles at the energy expended.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16   Go Up