Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: HMS Magnificent  (Read 9640 times)

6705russell

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,494
  • Model Boat Mayhem Forum is the Best!
  • Location: Staffordshire
HMS Magnificent
« on: September 04, 2007, 05:55:58 pm »

Dear all,

I am in the process of sorting out the props for my Deans Magnificent, it is twin prop and i am confused as to whether the props are supposed to turn inwards or outwards looking from the rear?

Can anyone help :-\

Russ
Logged

DickyD

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,423
  • www.srcmbc.org.uk
  • Location: Southampton UK
    • SRCMBC
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2007, 06:18:38 pm »

If you type "props" in the search box under your name you will get more information than you can handle. O0
Logged
Richard Solent Radio Controlled Model Boat Club http://www.srcmbc.org.uk

Shipmate60

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,862
  • You bark - I will bite!!!
  • Location: Fareham
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2007, 06:24:09 pm »

 6705russell
If she has a single rudder inwards will improve steering response.
Twin rudders doesnt matter much.

Bob
Logged
Officially a GOG.

6705russell

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,494
  • Model Boat Mayhem Forum is the Best!
  • Location: Staffordshire
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2007, 06:31:22 pm »

Thanks Guys O0
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2007, 07:22:35 pm »

Dear all,

I am in the process of sorting out the props for my Deans Magnificent, it is twin prop and i am confused as to whether the props are supposed to turn inwards or outwards looking from the rear?

Can anyone help :-\

Russ
Notwithstanding anything else that has been posted on this forum...and there have been LOTS I still maintain that outward turning props when viewed from the stern is the better all-round answer. Anyway, if you don't like it you can just try swapping the props around and change the rotation of the motors! Try both. BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

victorian

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2007, 11:18:58 am »

The props on my Hannibal based 'Mars' turn inwards when ahead, ie port clockwise, stbd anticlockwise. I found differential steering essential for safe handling near the shore. Power is two car heater motors. This is a heavy model and you need to be sure it won't run away on radio failure, as mine did!

If you are building 'Magnificent' note that the bridge structure is incorrect representing the mainmast aft of the bridge, not through it as it should be. Only the last three ships 'Prince George', 'Ceasar' and 'Hannibal' had the layout shown in the kit. Only 'Mars' had the main deck torpedo net shelf as built - the net shelf ran along the upper deck in the other ships and is much narrower than depicted in the kit.

Watch out for the printed bridge structure in the kit which is out of proportion and needs to be done again. The masts on the ships as built were mostly stepped not as shown in the kit. And numerous other details!

I'm not criticsing Deans over this - the hull is excellent and my model would never have got built without it. Congratulations to them for producing such an unusal prototype, long lost now and surprising to many spectators who've never seen the Victorian colour sheme.

Logged

rp6705

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2007, 12:10:22 pm »

Thanks again Victorian, can yo tell me what weight of ballast you nedde to get it down to its waterline?

Many thanks

Russ
Logged

victorian

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2007, 12:32:30 pm »

Total weight from memory is about 50lbs. I use 2 12v 12AH gel cells (about 15lbs each) as removable ballast. This gives a light water line, as though the coal is mostly gone. A further 8v 6AH gel cell (about 5lbs?) loads it to the white line and looks better if it's not too rough. I've never shipped any water but the superstructure design doesn't have any coaming so it could be vulnerable.

One of these batteries gives a seemingly unlimited sailing time.

One thing to watch out for with these heavy batteries is that if not restrained they will move if you hit something. That's what happened when it ran away and the stern was close to going under. I reinforced bow and stern with heavy filler and I'm glad I did!

I got my granson to work out the displacement in the bath and we got 18,000 tons, not far out, so he could tell his teacher that he weighed a battleship in the bath!
Logged

rp6705

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2007, 01:46:50 pm »

Are your bigger batteries located in the centre?

Did you need any ballast at the front of the ship?

Russ
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2007, 06:07:14 pm »

The props on my Hannibal based 'Mars' turn inwards when ahead, ie port clockwise, stbd anticlockwise. I found differential steering essential for safe handling near the shore. Power is two car heater motors. This is a heavy model and you need to be sure it won't run away on radio failure, as mine did!

If you are building 'Magnificent' note that the bridge structure is incorrect representing the mainmast aft of the bridge, not through it as it should be. Only the last three ships 'Prince George', 'Ceasar' and 'Hannibal' had the layout shown in the kit. Only 'Mars' had the main deck torpedo net shelf as built - the net shelf ran along the upper deck in the other ships and is much narrower than depicted in the kit.

Watch out for the printed bridge structure in the kit which is out of proportion and needs to be done again. The masts on the ships as built were mostly stepped not as shown in the kit. And numerous other details!

This one looks superb. Looks good enough to be one of Brian Kings! (And that is PRAISE!).

I'm not criticsing Deans over this - the hull is excellent and my model would never have got built without it. Congratulations to them for producing such an unusal prototype, long lost now and surprising to many spectators who've never seen the Victorian colour sheme.


Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

DickyD

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,423
  • www.srcmbc.org.uk
  • Location: Southampton UK
    • SRCMBC
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2007, 06:35:04 pm »

Weird posting Bryan  ???
Logged
Richard Solent Radio Controlled Model Boat Club http://www.srcmbc.org.uk

victorian

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2007, 07:41:37 pm »

Here's a shot of the loading. All the ballast is at the centre so that it can all be removed for carrying the model.

Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #12 on: September 05, 2007, 09:12:36 pm »

Weird posting Bryan  ???
Answered the wrong line is all..did't scroll down far enough. Sorry!
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

victorian

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #13 on: September 05, 2007, 10:14:37 pm »

Thanks for the compliment Bryan but my model is nowhere near the quality of Brian King's work I'm afraid.

My recollection of the weights was way off. The total ballast (according to our bathroom scales!) is 11.5 Kg, or 8.6 Kg when lightly loaded with the two 12AH batteries. An estimate for the total displacement is about 17 Kg, closer to 37.5 lbs than the 50 lbs I mentioned. Scaled up, that's 14,800 tons which agrees remarkably with the 14,820 tons quoted by RA Birt in Conway.
Logged

Admhawk

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #14 on: September 05, 2007, 10:23:31 pm »

Russ, I'm piping in a bit late, but are you wanting to know which way the original ship was, or what is best for your model?
Logged

rp6705

  • Guest
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2007, 06:55:12 am »

I wanted to know which was best for the model, i have them turning inwards looking from the back?

I will see how it performs on the water this weekend.

Thanks

Russ
Logged

DickyD

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,423
  • www.srcmbc.org.uk
  • Location: Southampton UK
    • SRCMBC
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2007, 09:01:59 am »

I wanted to know which was best for the model, i have them turning inwards looking from the back?

I will see how it performs on the water this weekend.

Thanks

Russ
Run my Scheutze turning in, definitely helps the steering.
Logged
Richard Solent Radio Controlled Model Boat Club http://www.srcmbc.org.uk

J.beazley

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 918
  • The building never ends
  • Location: Locks Heath, Hampshire
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2007, 01:29:56 pm »

Same here Richard got mine running inboard much better steering.

remember INBOARD=better steering OUTBOARD=better speed (or something like that)

Jay
Logged
1:48th scale for my ships. Large enough to show gratuitous detail, small enough to stay married.

Ghost in the shell

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,704
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2007, 04:02:48 pm »

i'd never thaught it would make any difference which way the props turned, anyone willing to do some scientific testing?
Logged
Go Nuclear!  you'll love it

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,883
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: HMS Magnificent
« Reply #19 on: September 12, 2007, 06:40:56 pm »

i'd never thaught it would make any difference which way the props turned, anyone willing to do some scientific testing?
Try driving a "full size" ship and you will rapidly appreciate the difference!
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.166 seconds with 18 queries.