Model Boat Mayhem

The Shipyard ( Dry Dock ): Builds & Questions => Working Vessels => Topic started by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 02, 2017, 08:24:19 pm

Title: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 02, 2017, 08:24:19 pm
I am thinking of building this illustrious ship and wondered if anyone else has built her. There was some interest years ago in this Forum but the pictures have been wiped out.

I am collating pictures, as is my usual way, in an effort to scratch build her to about 5 foot +.  The ship is 1020 foot long, so what is the nearest scale ratio I should use please.

Does anyone have any plans that may assist me please.  I have already collected some photocopies of pictures of plans which will prove a challenge to work from as they are very blurred, but at least they have lengths and widths that are measurable. 

Here's a picture of the ship in America.  I have viewed several YouTube films of tours around her, so the photographs are mounting up.

Over to you.   :-))

ken



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on January 02, 2017, 08:54:47 pm
Some more newsreel movies for you here Ken.

http://www.britishpathe.com/search/query/queen+mary+ship
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: dougal99 on January 02, 2017, 08:58:14 pm
1:200 scale would give a model 61.2 inches long. Good luck with your build I'll follow it with great interest
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TheLongBuild on January 02, 2017, 08:59:29 pm

I have the pictures I took when I visited her if of any use..


Pm me your email if you want them.   :-))


Regards
Larry




oooh Whats changed I can do Emojis now ..in W10
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 02, 2017, 09:09:06 pm
Thanks for the Pathe news site, Nemo.  I've book marked it and will go through it.

Thank you for the scale calculation, Dougal . It sounds just right.

Thanks for the pictures offer Larry, I have collated quite a few but if I need better details , perhaps I may call upon you.

I think I enjoy the start of the builds better than the finishing off.     {-)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: cos918 on January 02, 2017, 09:56:38 pm
Hi Ken
For scale her length is 311m you want 5ft or 1.52m =1:204 drop down to 1:200 she will work out 1.55 m long or 5.08 foot.
There are two people on her that have models of her . Mick French and Jason Lester .  I will let them know of this post. I think I know were there may be plans


john
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: cos918 on January 02, 2017, 09:59:44 pm
Hi Ken
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RMS-QUEEN-MARY-LINER-CUNARD-WHITE-STAR-1936-PLAN-FOR-BUILDING-MODEL-SHIP-/262488023266?hash=item3d1d8160e2:g:uxkAAOSwOVpXZBoj
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vintage-Cunard-Line-Ship-Queen-Mary-Print-Blueprint-Plan-24-x-34-002-/252707402032?hash=item3ad688f130:g:B8IAAMXQydtTKkJw


http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/H-M-S-QUEEN-MARY-ship-boat-model-boat-plan-/201601911500?hash=item2ef0690acc:g:764AAOSwq7JUIsuR


Last one might be best for you as I think there is hull profile on there


John

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 02, 2017, 10:14:51 pm
Brown Son and Ferguson do two sets of plans from the Underhill Range:

http://www.skipper.co.uk/catalogue/drawings-and-plans/working-plans-for-scaled-ship-models-power-craft-list/page/4 (http://www.skipper.co.uk/catalogue/drawings-and-plans/working-plans-for-scaled-ship-models-power-craft-list/page/4)

There is a large model in the possession of the Southampton Maritime Museum, 1/48 scale I think. http://www.modelboats.co.uk/news/article/a-vanished-era/7072 (http://www.modelboats.co.uk/news/article/a-vanished-era/7072)

This article was written when it was on display in the old premises but I think it is still on show in the new museum.

You will be taking on 22 lifeboats and 2000 portholes - good luck with that!

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 02, 2017, 10:17:45 pm
Great information John.  Many thanks so far. Yes, I would be interested in further details and for any further help from you.  I have a poor quality hull profile and could do with a better version.

It does look like   1:200  is the way to go.  I can twin her up with  Titanic  on the shelf.     :}

ken



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 02, 2017, 10:20:47 pm
Thank you Colin.  Very interesting, I'm glad you've come on board as I was going to write to you, knowing your affinity to this craft.   ok2

I'm away to dreamland now so have plenty to think about.

cheers

ken


ps

Hi Colin,

Your post came just in.  I LOVE doing windows.    :D

Going by the prices, I shall need a lot of plans.  ooh er


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on January 02, 2017, 11:24:37 pm
Well Ken....that is certainly an interesting listing and plan set that Colin has provided........

......when added 2 6's =12 +2=14...carry the 1...4+2 =6.......reminded me of that song ''When I am 64" ......[well 64 £ & a bit]...or just about your age & a bit  %) ;D

http://www.skipper.co.uk/catalogue/drawings-and-plans/working-plans-for-scaled-ship-models-power-craft-list/page/4
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: furball on January 03, 2017, 06:58:14 am
If you can, try and get hold of the 'Anatomy of the Ship' book of her. There's lots of plans and photos in there.


https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cunard-Liner-Queen-Mary-Anatomy/dp/0851775292 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cunard-Liner-Queen-Mary-Anatomy/dp/0851775292)


Lance
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 03, 2017, 10:43:10 am
Which ever way I go, it's sounding an expensive route by the look of it.   :o 

Here's me fast approaching 75  (4 weeks)  with a pension less than my earnings for my first job all those years ago.  As you all know by now, I don't like expensive purchases and try to not spend money unless I have to.  This is why I have taken to scratch building  (apart from the desire to keep occupied !)  it tends to keep the  'ol'  brain active at a low cost.

The plan is to determine the 'Frames dimensions' and various lengths and sizes from a few good pictures, and away we go onto the production line.


Thank you for all your support

Cheers

ken
 


 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 03, 2017, 10:54:28 am
The hull should be easy enough Ken, just get 2,000 holes and stick them together - just the cost of the glue then.... ;)

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 03, 2017, 10:57:11 am
Morning Colin.  It's not the holes that bother me but the surrounding material.

                                                {-)    {-)    {-)

I have found the frames drawings................... yippeeeeeee

cheers

ken

     
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on January 03, 2017, 05:38:43 pm
The best plans available are the Harold Underhill plans from the Model Dockyard  http://www.model-dockyard.com/acatalog/Harold_Underhill_Powered_Ship_Plans.html
These are to a scale of 1/192nd scale.  There is a smaller scale version also.  The down side is the  1:192 version is 50 quid a set.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Netleyned on January 03, 2017, 05:47:06 pm
Please,please can a Mod remove the
Number 1 from the title of this topic.
She was Queen Mary plain and simple.
I hate when there are sequels or follow
ons that the original gets the label 1.
 >>:-( >>:-( >>:-(

Ned

I thought it looked unusual as well so I've removed it now

Thanks for the  'heads up' Ned

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 03, 2017, 05:49:46 pm
TailUK - those are the plans I have already mentioned above!

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on January 03, 2017, 05:59:50 pm
TailUK - those are the plans I have already mentioned above!

Colin

      Sounds like it and a bit cheaper than the Model Dockyard too!
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TheLongBuild on January 03, 2017, 06:07:02 pm
a few pics I took of QM 1  %)



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TheLongBuild on January 03, 2017, 06:11:06 pm
.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TheLongBuild on January 03, 2017, 06:13:35 pm
.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 03, 2017, 06:21:58 pm
That brings back a few memories Larry. In my photo collection I have a pic of me standing in front of the bow in 2001 and another in exactly the same position at Southampton in 1967! I was a bit shorter then...

They don't make 'em like that anymore.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary 1
Post by: Rottweiler on January 03, 2017, 07:26:00 pm
Just going to say Colin,they do compare nicely to your photos of her.
I do have a set of full plans for her Kenny, but I am afraid they are so very fragile,I hesitate to take them out of their protective tube.
My model of her,as you probably know is 9 feet 3 inches long in old money,and is completely radio controlled,but has not been on the water for about 15 years.Hopefully at the Warwick Show,next year,If I am invited,with the very welcome help of John Walravens,she will hopefully be going on the water under her own power.
We actually did get my other large model of the QE2,working on the water this year,woops thats last year now!
As I didnt build the models myself,Im afraid I cant be of much help,but am certainly looking forward to yours.
PS, Colins suggestion of sticking a lot of holes together,maybe you could use Polo mints,if they are the correct scale,then at some stage,if you get fed up with making her you could say this model sucks,break off a piece and just do that lol
Good Luck
Mick F
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Brian60 on January 03, 2017, 07:46:26 pm
Yowzah. That's an awful lot of rivet and plate detail in those photos, its going to take Ken a lifetime to get all that done.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: JerryTodd on January 03, 2017, 08:19:52 pm
Way back in 2009, a fellow posted his unorthodox build of the Queen.  His is 8.5 feet long, but, not so deep  ;)

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?531343-QUEEN-MARY-birth-of-a-cardboard-titan

He has several more threads there about this and other large cardboard models he's built.

Oddly, I've found several posts in other forums of 5 foot-ish Queen Marys and not one was built by the owner, but bought complete.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 04, 2017, 10:31:30 am
Well everyone.........  A big thank you so far for all the help coming my way.   :-))

I am busy copying the pictures (from this Forum) and collating the data.   (the fun part of the job).   I spent the day printing out the sketches and pictures I have, to be able to draw the plans.  So far, I have the side view at 1:200 scale and the frames details.  She looks very long at 5.5 feet and not very tall but time will tell.  (anyone know the height of mid ships to the keel ???   Mine looks rather thin in this aspect, but I'm assured this is correct ?  perhaps it's an illusion because the top decks and funnels are not in the picture yet . ??

I've got a drill for the 2000 window holes Colin.  It's the rest of the build that bother me.

Fantastic hobby when you're getting your teeth into something.   :}

Cheers for now

ken



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Netleyned on January 04, 2017, 10:51:59 am
Queen Mary,


 :-)) :-)) :-))


Thanks Ken, I assume you did the editing.


Ned
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 04, 2017, 11:21:27 am
If it is going to be a working model Ken then you are likely to have some real issues with stability so the more holes the better!

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on January 04, 2017, 01:55:30 pm
Hi Ken,
I really admire you taking on that vessel :-)

What are your thoughts on how you are going to build it as I remember the problems you had with the Titanic's stability - I know when I was considering building P & O liner the Canberra - my thoughts were going along the lines of planking the hull up to the waterline - and then using either 1/16 ply or balsa wood for the sides or even lite ply - also reducing the widths of the frames for the upper sections. 

Also instead of using plasticard for plating use cardboard/cartridge paper.

Just a thought for you Ken.  watching with great interest  :-)) :-))

John
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 04, 2017, 02:30:46 pm
As John says, it will be tempting to use plasticard but it is quite a heavy material in the thicknesses you would need.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Capt Podge on January 04, 2017, 02:46:51 pm
This thread has got the old grey matter wakened up. Now, this is just some thoughts on the stability issue - would it be possible to incorporate, say, a pair of I-beams into the hull bottom, into which would slide an appropriately weighted section of lead. By this I mean the top of the I-beams would be on the inside of the hull and the remainder external. Then, when it comes to displaying the model, an appropriately shaped "plinth" could be slid into the I-beams in place of the lead, thereby mounting the hull proud of the display stand.

Having said all that, I've never tried the idea myself. Could be a way to go but of course would add some more time into your build.

As I say - it's just a thought....

Looking forward to the build as well by the way.

Regards,

Ray.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 04, 2017, 03:08:39 pm

You are all correct in your thoughts of stability.  It is on my mind so various ideas are being considered.

The Titanic did overbalance and was never successful on the water.  I hope to improve things with this model by keeping the weight very low down.  The upper-works will be made from lighter plastic to give it a better chance of staying upright. 

cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Howard on January 04, 2017, 03:20:01 pm
That's a great Idea  Ray I'll remember it for when I build some others.


      Regards Howard.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 04, 2017, 03:32:10 pm
Ken, You could consider the traditional method of deepening the underwater hull a bit. It need not be very noticeable but will give you some useful buoyancy in hand for extra ballast.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on January 04, 2017, 03:51:07 pm
Ken. Not a great deal here to assist you as a builder but a good read anyway- plus you get to play the horns - over and over again!
Bob.

http://www.sterling.rmplc.co.uk/visions/decks.html
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on January 04, 2017, 05:13:17 pm
Suffice to say as a 'structural requirement', I don't understand why the uppermost deck level in her hull looks to be substantially more reinforced with closer rivet to frame spacing and extra joggling plates, than the deck level immediately below

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on January 04, 2017, 05:25:37 pm
Hi Derek

I do believe the area/steelwork which you are referring to was actually a stiffening belt of steel plating built around the deck level of certain ships.   It was to aid to allow certain movement in the ship - as when the ship is travelling over rough seas and the ship does what is known as 'hogs & sags' between crests of waves.   This stiffening band allows the ship to move slightly.  This practice of adding an extra row of plating as well as rivets was carried on, on all welded ships.  This was up until about the 1960s in certain vessels.    If you have a look at some cargo ships which have been of an all welded construction, they had a band of riveted plating around the top deck, especially oil tankers.  Vertical jogging plats on the outside will no doubt correspond to the butt straps on the inside plating.

Hope this is of some help.

John
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on January 04, 2017, 05:57:14 pm
Thanks bluebird......

I had assumed a description such as this, however had never studied such build construction, nor have seen such extreme build plating detail....

I think without  todays computer finite analysis, factors of safety in engineering design in earlier years would have been [an overkill] by todays standards .....

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: NFMike on January 04, 2017, 05:59:18 pm
I've never heard of that before, but it certainly makes sense. The hull is like a beam, and as you can see on a steel I-beam the loads and strength are on the top and bottom. This reinforcing at the top would presumably equal the strength of and around the keel.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 04, 2017, 05:59:44 pm
Derek, as John says, it is the top of the 'hull girder' together with the promenade deck above it which is the 'strength deck'.  These are the counterpart of the double bottom/keel and together give the hull its longitudinal strength - a sort of box section really.

The superstructure is literally that, it sits on top and slightly overlaps the strength deck but is not a load bearing component as such. As with the Titanic, there would have been expansion joints in the superstructure to take up any flexing of the main hull.

As you say, they built them strong in those days on the better safe than sorry principle. The stresses on today's welded hulls are indeed subject to computer analysis.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on January 04, 2017, 06:20:05 pm
Thanks Colin.....

I suspect RMS Queen Mary [circa 1934 build] may be one of the last vessels [of such size] to display conventional exposed round head riveted construction as opposed to blind or flush riveting used in similar or larger vessels some years later....eg., Iowa Class Battleships [circa 1943]

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on January 04, 2017, 06:32:40 pm
Hi there Derek

Even with modern computers I am afraid the designers still cannot get it right sometimes.   Think of the Royal Navy's Type 42 batch 3 stretched Destroyers - not long after completion they were called back  by to the 'manufacturers' stress on the decks causing the hull to begin to crack.  So what did they do - they welded a box section girder either side of the hull at deck level to strengthen it.   

When I was building a model of the Duburg, I noticed that there was a line along the hull - at first I couldn't understand what it was on the drawing - I contacted Jim Pottinger and he sent me clearer photographs showing that it was a welded stiffening plate, either side of the hull and this was on an all welded hull.  If you can make it out on the photograph - you can see it extends from the rear of the superstructure to just short of the bow.

John
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on January 04, 2017, 06:48:09 pm
Thanks Colin.....I suspect RMS Queen Mary [circa 1934 build] may be one of the last vessels [of such size] to display conventional exposed round head riveted construction as opposed to blind or flush riveting used in similar or larger vessels some years later....eg., Iowa Class Battleships [circa 1943]Derek

I often wondered about the drag effect of all those exposed (as opposed to flush) rivets under water and the cumulative effect on speed and fuel consumption. On the QM there were 10,000,000 of them weighing 4000 tons!.  No wonder welding became the accepted method, accelerated by wartime construction.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TheLongBuild on January 04, 2017, 06:50:01 pm
Interesting to see that at one point Disney Owned the Queen Mary.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 05, 2017, 10:58:43 am

We are on FIRE.    :}  :}

I suppose I'd better build something now   (only joking !).  The plotting and planning is going ahead at a rate on knots now.  Many thanks Nemo for the Web site of interested parties where I've just spent the best part of life reading and digesting the Queen Mary ship and all her interesting details.  (Well I didn't know that,,,,,, comes to mind)

I have loads of structural details now to enable the KEEL to be laid.  I thought I might make it from OAK, Colin, to get some weight  'down there'.   Plans are afoot for an added keel of lead to be fitted lakeside, if to only to keep her 'sailing upright'  !!!



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Capt Podge on January 05, 2017, 05:19:57 pm
Well now, that's all good news Kenny - hoping all goes well for you.

Regards,

Ray.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 09, 2017, 10:20:32 am
TODAY WE STARTED THE BULD

The keel was cut from an old door found in the back of the workshop.  I made it by extending the height of it up inside the ship.

The frames were cut from plywood and sanded to shape.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 09, 2017, 10:25:51 am
Here is the keel with it's added height.  The frames were laid in place to get an overall picture.

She is now 5 foot 3 inches long and looks to become quite a BIG UN     :}    {-)     I hope I can lift it around.

Cheers for now.





Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on January 09, 2017, 08:51:59 pm
You have given her a good stout keel Ken. I can see the positives of having a wide keel for beamy models and may allow a stuffing tube to be inserted through it without any reinforcement to the basic keel piece.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 09, 2017, 09:03:01 pm

Yes indeed it's sturdy.  This is to keep the weight low down to keep her upright in the water.

The ship has 4 props so they will be each side of the keel so the strength should be OK.

I did ask on another thread about the planking and if there was a supplier.  Having looked on the web,  Obechi wood strip cost around a pound per yard so I may have to cut some planks myself.   %)   Last time it cost me the damage to my thumb.

ken


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 09, 2017, 09:04:07 pm

Just noticed the thread is 3 pages long and the build has only just started.     {-)   {-)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 09, 2017, 09:20:07 pm
Well, the original ship was over 1,000 feet long Ken so still some way to go yet....

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 09, 2017, 09:25:32 pm

It's Swamping my work bench ...................... {-)


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 22, 2017, 10:18:01 pm

Still quietly working on the frames.

I have them  'hollowed out' and glued  to the keel but it's 4 degrees C so I'm not in the workshop for long.  My gas heater has run out !!

One question though,  does wood glue still work at this temperature  ?  I'll post some pictures tomorrow.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Stavros on January 22, 2017, 10:25:04 pm
Never had a problem with evostick waterproof wood glue at that temp Ken


Dave
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on January 22, 2017, 10:25:46 pm
If it is PVA then it will just be slower as the evaporaton of the solvent (in this case water) is less active in cooler temparatures.

If it is a PU resin glue or similar than again it will be slower as the chemical reaction is retarded. I think you would have probems if it was sub zero temperatures  %%
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on January 22, 2017, 10:31:39 pm
Ain'tcha finished it yet Ken - or have you run out of holes?  ok2

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TheLongBuild on January 22, 2017, 10:39:50 pm
 :-) Should have been able to knock this up in 2-3 days :-)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 23, 2017, 10:28:55 am

Just been out and checked it.. took the clips off and it's holding.   :-))   I won't be forcing it apart to test as it seems Ok at the moment.  The temperature is now up to 6 degrees which is cold for working so I'll have to invest in a replacement gas bottle today.

I am trying the new wood glue from 'Axmister'.  It's a bit expensive so it's probably built for the job.

Colin, I haven't got around to the holes yet but looking forward to that side of it.  (along with the 200 rivets)    :}

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 23, 2017, 12:00:11 pm

I have replaced the gas bottle and away we go ................

Here's some shots of the build so far.  The frames are secured and the planking  has been cut on the bandsaw.  The first batch seem secured overnight so now it's a bit warmer, I shall fit a few more planks today.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on January 23, 2017, 09:38:55 pm
That's where the worlds supply of clamps went  :} You do get a shufti on once you have started Ken.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 23, 2017, 09:49:23 pm

Never enough B.    {-)

Not much to show for todays work but further planks have been  'tacked' on.  No room for the clamps now we are in the middle section.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 24, 2017, 04:39:14 pm
Today's update.  Fifty quids worth so far.   :}

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: JerryTodd on January 25, 2017, 04:45:38 pm
I have to say, a carpeted workbench is a new one for me.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 25, 2017, 07:19:04 pm

Always used it Jerry.  Softer to work on and protects the item being worked on.

It also protects against  'dropped or bouncing' components or screws.   :}

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Brian60 on January 25, 2017, 07:52:22 pm
Large thick elastic bands can be slipped over and they apply enough clamping pressure. You just need to be aware of possible damage to the top edge of the last plank.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 25, 2017, 09:30:59 pm
 What's the best way to seal the gaps between planking please.

I had thought of another layer of planks but that's a lot of work and it would make it heavier.   %) 

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on January 25, 2017, 10:32:22 pm
Glynn Guest mentions using slivers of balsa when filling gaps on his models, so in your case, using hardwoods can you carve slivers of wood and stick these in the gaps?

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on January 26, 2017, 10:33:24 am

Wood   it is then.

Just been out to have a look and it's 3 degrees C,  so the gas fire is on while I come back into the house for a warm up.   :}

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: dougal99 on January 26, 2017, 08:33:03 pm
I filled the minute gaps in my Brittany trawler by covering the outside with tape and forcing filler into the gaps from the inside.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 03, 2017, 08:34:23 pm

The real plans have arrived.  (told you I was keen !!)

It seems I've made a few errors on the  length,  width,  and  height,  but hey,  I've got the wood the right colour.

Tomorrow we start again.     8)

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 03, 2017, 10:41:42 pm
Turn your first attempt into an auxilliary cruiser ken.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 04, 2017, 08:21:23 pm

As I've spent so much money on the timber I decided to salvage as much as I could.  It was over to the  'Power Saws'  for a slicing exercise.  I have cut out the keel and saved the cladding.  New frames are being made and it is hoped to salvage as much of the planking as possible.

Here is the sad sight .........................


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 04, 2017, 08:36:32 pm
A stitch in time Ken...

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 04, 2017, 08:51:51 pm
Quote
A stitch in time Ken...

Colin



Yes indeed Colin.  Any further in the build and it would have been impossible to correct.   I was in doubt about the curves etc when building it as the shape seemed  'not right' , and features did not line up as per the pictures I have of her.  She is actually quite a thin ship but very tall.  Mine was 30mm wider in the centre section, which is a lot in modelling terms.

I just hope I can salvage enough of the planking to proceed.

cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 04, 2017, 09:28:49 pm
If you have a sanding bit for your power drill, you might be able to cut as much of the old frames away as poss and then sand the remaining frame wood away to save damaging the planking by pulling and levering. Would the planks retain any of their curves once parted?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 04, 2017, 09:34:33 pm

It should be fun  I'll try the  'Sonic'  cutter  (with headphones on of course)   :}

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Stavros on February 04, 2017, 10:45:51 pm
WOA slow down and sit and think about this....Right how about this....Why not dremel down to within 1mm of the planks and simply place your new frames either in front or behind the old frames....might be barking up the wrong tree(excuse the pun) could be worth a try




Dave
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on February 05, 2017, 10:26:46 am
Hi ya there Ken

Sad to see that things haven't worked out as planned - sometimes they don't - but when you do have the right plans and the hull doesn't match, it is best policy to start over again.   

As far as salvaging planks - have you thought about placing what is left of the model in the bath and pouring boiling kettle water over it - obviously careful for your hands.   After a few goes - this tends to soften and break free the majority of glues - I DO HAVE THE TEE SHIRT here :-)   that happened to me on one of my builds a while ago - when I noticed the hull had a twist in the keel even though I put it on the building board - another story.

Having said that hand on heart - even though I salvaged several planks I couldn't get them to lie properly like freshly cut planks - so out of maybe 100 I salvaged I only ended up using about 40 of the blighters :-)

John :-)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 05, 2017, 10:32:26 am
Morning Dave.  Yes,  I am studying the situation and will be  hoping to preserve the overall integrity of the  'joined together'  planking.   (I agree it should stay preserved  'Ballastanksian' )

Thanks for the idea John.  I had considered soaking them but didn't want to damage them.  I'll try the dry fit first and see how much I can preserve.

I have started to cut the new frames and the difference is astounding.  I was over 60mm too wide amidships and this is what niggling me, as it looked too wide for the real ship. I did at least get the height and length correct.

Hopefully I can refit the new wall of planking in one go as most of it is flat.  I anticipate problems at the (now) straight bow lines, as the old planking glue has set them in a curve.  This will have to be split apart but doesn't seem a major problem at the moment and I have plenty of wood. The enclosed picture shows the two halves close together and even this it too wide ??????

It's great to proceed knowing I'm on the right path now.  Thank you fellas for all your interest.  I'll be back.

ken


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Plastic - RIP on February 05, 2017, 12:18:40 pm
A good portion of the sides and the bottom are a flat slab - why not save your planking skills for the curved bits only and make the flat bits out of a thicker wood plank - sort of 50% bread & butter construction?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John R Haynes on February 05, 2017, 03:29:56 pm
I guess its a bit late now but you could have bought my waterline Queen Mary at 1/200 from Fleetscale who have all my moulds.I built this years ago for a Canadian client as a w/l model . With this moulded upperworks you could have added the bottom of the hull but I have only just read this thread.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 10:42:01 am

Thank you plastic.  I hope to save as much of the  'bonded together wood'  as I possibly can.  It's turning out to be a very interesting way of building a boat and I'm enjoying the challenge to the ol grey cells.   :}

It's very kind of you to offer, John. Thank you indeed for your thoughts.  The new frames are in the process of being  'sized up' and it's going together a lot better with not being curved so much.  There will be pictures soon of the progress and I'm really  'buoyed up'   about this model.  I have a wealth of data now, so I'm chugging along at full steam ahead.

I've just finished opening my 75th birthday presents and pleased to get on with the extra glue I received.  (how did they know that's what I wanted   {-)  )

Cheers

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on February 06, 2017, 11:35:45 am
The real plans have arrived.  (told you I was keen !!)

It seems I've made a few errors on the  length,  width,  and  height,  but hey,  I've got the wood the right colour.

Tomorrow we start again.     8)

ken

Did you get the Underhill plans, Ken?   When I bought my QM hull I got some of the Underhill plan set but was missing the General Arrangement side view.  Does that sheet have the plating details and porthole sizes on it?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on February 06, 2017, 11:37:34 am
Happpppppppppppppppppppy 75th birthday Ken....from all of us  O0

Making any matchsticks lately?....... {-)

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 11:47:11 am
Did you get the Underhill plans, Ken?   When I bought my QM hull I got some of the Underhill plan set but was missing the General Arrangement side view.  Does that sheet have the plating details and porthole sizes on it?


Hi TailUK,

Unfortunately no.  I have bought  the  (Expensive) book by Ross Watton featuring the Queen Mary which includes the workshop drawings and scale plans for the ship.  I may be able to answer particular questions of detail should you be interested.  Can I assume you are also building this magnificent ship ?

Cheers,
ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 11:49:43 am
Thank you Derek,

My.... it's been an interesting and busy morning.  Not one drop of glue has been used yet.    :}     :}

I never thought I'd reach this age, what with all the defects.    {-)  {-)

Off for a celebratory McDonalds now.  Catch you all later.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on February 06, 2017, 12:47:17 pm

Hi TailUK,

Unfortunately no.  I have bought  the  (Expensive) book by Ross Watton featuring the Queen Mary which includes the workshop drawings and scale plans for the ship.  I may be able to answer particular questions of detail should you be interested.  Can I assume you are also building this magnificent ship ?

Cheers,
ken

        I bought a partially complete hull at Whitwick last year and it's drifting slowly to the top of the build list.  It was built as a static model as the props had been glued onto the end of the prop tubes which had been plugged with putty.  The hull had been painted black at some point and I assume that the portholes had painted on as well.
The Ross Watton book is very good especially when you begin to detail but I found it a little wanting some areas.  The only side views are to 1/700 scale which makes figurering the size and spacing of portholes a bit tricky. 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 06, 2017, 01:39:40 pm
Happy Birthday Ken!

With regard to the portHOLES. At 1:200 scale a very effective way to simulate them for little effort is to get some Trimline tape, either dark blue or black as you prefer and punch them out with a leather punch.

Run some masking tape along the painted hull to follow the sheer line with the top edge at base of porthole level and mark in pencil the locations of the portholes. Then apply them in groups until you go cross eyed and need a rest. The adhesive is waterproof and the tape is really thin. You will find it looks very effective. The photo below is a scan of a badly faded print of my Empress of Britain model to 1:150 scale which used this technique.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Trawlerman-Les on February 06, 2017, 04:14:08 pm
 :-)) :-)) :-))

Happy birthday Ken. Mine today too, but I'm just a youngster of 66!  ;)

Les
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on February 06, 2017, 06:56:10 pm
We share 1942 Ken - what a vintage! Many happy returns. The original QM was 'born' about a mile from where I arrived, in Clydebank a few years prior.  :-))
Bob,
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Netleyned on February 06, 2017, 07:02:14 pm
1942 was a vintage year for us :-))


Ned
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on February 06, 2017, 07:26:08 pm
HAPPY BIRTHDAY KEN 21 AGAIN - HOPE YOU ENJOYED YOUR McDONALD'S HAPPY MEAL
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 07:44:41 pm
Here's my window shot, TailUK.  Yes there are a few mmmh!!!  A bit more research needed methinks.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 07:45:42 pm
Happy birthday as well Les.  Not a good year for Kings back then.


ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 07:49:37 pm

Hi John,

Just woken up.    It was a great fat gut filling load of calories indeed, so had to sleep that one off.    {-)    {-)   Good job I had the sense to renew my wood stock of planking ready for tomorrow's work out.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 06, 2017, 08:53:03 pm
Happy Birthday Ken! Keep on building those ships and trucks.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 09:01:10 pm

Thank you Ballastanksian.

The workshop opens tomorrow.  You should see the sawdust on everything.     {-)   The  'Cleaner'  has vowed to go around with the vac first.  tehe

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Peter Fitness on February 06, 2017, 09:30:36 pm
Happy birthday Ken :-))  You're catching up to me, I was 80 on January 25 <:(


I'm following the QM build with great interest, she was a proper ship O0



Peter.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 06, 2017, 09:37:32 pm

Thanks Peter.  I've not known such enthusiasm myself.  I'm really into everything about this ship. There's loads on YouTube and if you freeze the films, you can count the windows if you've a mind to.   %)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 08, 2017, 09:15:10 pm

Loads of work done  (in my head).  and finally got the correct measurements to proceed..

I have made the new frames to the correct sizes and started fitting them today.  they are now glued in so I've started work on removing the old cut in half frames from the planking.   I was surprised how easy they were to remove from their glued position. I used a large pair of pliers and twisted the beams sideways, left and right,  and they just broke away leaving the planks undamaged but still glued together in a sheet of planks.

The plan is to re-use these on the new frames.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 15, 2017, 10:31:44 am

Sorry it's been a while for updates.  I have been re-making the hull by using the old planking parts from the original hull.


I now know this a completely different job to making a new one.  It has been a nightmare trying to use the  'bent and glued together'  pieces and there is now more joins than I would have liked.  I  would not recommend this method to anyone.

Most of it was scrapped as I only managed to save the straight pieces.  I hope to smooth out the joins with filler now that I have a successful shape, and it's looking a lot better.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 15, 2017, 10:36:44 am
The shape looks better now Ken.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 15, 2017, 10:46:49 am

 Thank you Colin.

She is more to scale now and it's  'wrongness'  (is that the word ?) has disappeared.  The shape looks right at last.

Just a question at this early stage.......... I have 4 props and tubes on order but am concerned with driving them.  (speed controller etc.)

I have 4 new 7.2 volt  Tamiya motors and thought that, as they are fast. I might wire 2 in series to slow them down for a 12v volt supply and an Action dual speed controller.
 
Do you think that the speeds will be slower and the current draw be more than the Action P98 will handle. ?

ken

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 15, 2017, 11:29:18 am
I am not really the person to ask on that Ken but it is not usually advisable to wire motors in series as manufacturing differences can mean that one will 'steal' power from the other and performance can be unpredictable.

The best way of varying the power is to vary the voltage using a speed controller with your battery voltage being set at the highest speed you are likely to need. If they are intrinsically high revving motors you might need to gear them down. My personal preference is to do that anyway using pulley drive as it allows the motor to run at a more efficient speed and reduces power consumption.

If you post the specs of the Tamiya motors on here then I'm sure that some of our more knowledgeable members will be able to give you a steer. It is of course a big model so you might have to do a bit of experimenting to get the right setup.

According to the Underhill plans catalogue I have, the 63 inch version of Queen Mary will displace 25.5 lb so that is the weight you need to push around the lake.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 15, 2017, 11:58:58 am

Thanks Colin,

I'll do a bit of research and see what happens on the test bench.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on February 15, 2017, 05:32:23 pm
Hi ya there Ken

I have been googling the Tamiya motors of 7.2 volts; the majority of them seem to be very thirsty on the amperage.  Rather than amperage they tend to use the terminology of armature turns; at least that is what I think they are going on about.  To be honest with you, personally I think these motors would be rather too vicious for the model in ways of difficult to control.   As you are suggesting, connecting 2 motors up, I have a feeling what may happen (as Colin has suggested) is one motor would slow down and the paired (2) motor would speed up drastically and tend to overload the speed controller.

HMS Exeter has a 4 motor system in 2 pairs but the motors are 500s running on 6 volts and powered by a P94 20 amp speed controller.   In tests in a very small test tank seem to handle quite well.

I will put a link on to show you the layout:
http://www.modelboatmayhem.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,33734.msg400574.html#msg400574

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on February 15, 2017, 11:58:53 pm
Ken.....four cheap automotive ventilation fan motors from the wreckers would be ideal for a model of such a vessel ...low current draw...~~4 amps stall current....will easily spin large propellers [slowly as it is not a speed boat >>:-(]

With the larger motor case diameter, they could be set as staggered pairs as shown by bluebird....

A pair of ACTion ESC's would be a perfect match......

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 16, 2017, 02:23:36 pm

Thanks for all the motor advice.  I did have a feeling about this set up, so glad I've mentioned it now.

I shall be going John's way with the layout as I have plenty of room along with Mr Action's fine gear.

Colin, the Tamiya motors are for the ' hot headed' youths which is why we don't use them in our trucks.  I always have to buy slower ones hence, my stock of new original motors is growing.

I'm now in  the market for 4 new motors.

Today I bought some P38 filler and plastered the hull with the lot.. Hopefully I will able to sand off most of it for a nice flat hull.  Here it is out in the winter sun, hardening up a treat.  It's beginning to look the part  (from a distance).


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Rottweiler on February 16, 2017, 07:57:31 pm
thats a whole lot of sanding to do! Beginning to take on the shape you need!
Keep up the good work
Mick F
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 16, 2017, 08:29:13 pm

Cheers Mick,  I've been told to do it outside with a mask on.    %)

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 16, 2017, 08:59:37 pm
Now you've iced it, don't forget the candles first!

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Rottweiler on February 16, 2017, 09:24:57 pm
Ken,
shouldnt take long to finish her now then lol!
Heres mine but not made by me!
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 16, 2017, 09:31:34 pm

I knew about this one Mick.  It gives me something to aim for.   :}

It's certainly lovely.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 18, 2017, 02:08:44 pm
We had a day outside with the power tools.   %%

Dust everywhere....  Thank goodness is it was windy.   When everything was sanded down we repaired to the warm workshop for sandpaper and a flat rubbing block.  I am so pleased as it came out rather well.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 18, 2017, 02:11:09 pm

As the sun was out we decided to go for a light dusting of red oxide.  This will show any final flaws and moves me one step nearer completion of the hull.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 18, 2017, 02:16:35 pm

Back to the motors problem.

What do the members think of installing brushless motors please.  ?   I have never been this route before and fancy the idea, as the ship will be quite heavy and will need a bit o 'Grunt'    %)  I have room for 35 mm propellers and 4 motor locations will not be a problem.  I will need to know speeds and sizes and amps sort of thing.

cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: cos918 on February 18, 2017, 06:39:56 pm
Hi Ken
Slow scale brushless is not a easy as fast models .You will be looking about 6000 rpm on your props . so a 7.4v lipo would be looking at 800 kv . At 12v the kv would be 500 kv . to find brushless motors with the lower KV can be hard .You could look a reduction and use a higher rated KV motor . Have a look a Hobby King UK website to see whats avaible .


john
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 18, 2017, 07:24:41 pm
Ken,

I would have thought that the model could be pushed along quite adequately by brushed motors, after all it is a slim hull. No point in paying the premium for brushless motors and controllers if a conventional setup can do the job equally well.

I would cost out both options to see how they compare.

I seem to recall that Glynn Guest did write an article a while back which dealt with matching power requirements to model sizes. I also wrote a general article in the Model Boats 2011 Special Issue which I will email to you. It included some sample practical power setups.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Rottweiler on February 18, 2017, 09:12:47 pm
I was going to suggest you ask John Walravens to work out the power to weight ratio you might need,but I note he has already commented.
IMHO I really dont think you would  be advised to use brushless motors,as I feel they are more for speed,and that is not one of your requirements?
In my model of her,There are four old fashioned,but very reliable Renault car heater motors.I dont think they draw a lot either.These give me the performance required,and a little bit of speed should I need it to get me out of trouble.You will not need anything of this size,if they are still available,but I maybe talking out of my er hat,but I would have thought ordinary brushed motors of the Torpedo type would suit?
Mick F
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 19, 2017, 10:33:34 am

Thanks for all the replies.

I am digesting Colin's write up on motors and will probably not go the 'brushless route' after all. It would be new to me and probably be wrong for this type of model anyway.  She is slim enough to slide through the water without too much force required.

Just had a look at her in the workshop and feel motivated to get on with the build.  Ain't it grand to have a hobby.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 19, 2017, 02:11:59 pm
People have been building Battleships as big as your Liner for years on Brushed motors, so as reccomended above stick to what you know for this one. I salute you for removing all the filler Ken, that was an epic abrasion  %%

She looks good on Red oxide, almost good enough just to apply masking tape and spray the Black/Charcoal on top.

Have you outsourced your Daily duties? You are motoring along with this build even taking the impressive decision to start again.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 20, 2017, 02:53:09 pm
Work is not  'outsourced'.   I just keep going till I drop.   :}

I have been very busy with the smoothing out by rubbing down by hand with sand paper.  Scheesh...what a dirty job.  I've finally got her flat to the eye and she still need little pock marks filled.  I have cut the deck to go around the sides leaving a gaping hole in the centre and have it glued under heavy weights, so cannot do any more today.  (what's on TV !)

Here's a few views.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 20, 2017, 02:57:09 pm

I forgot to mention that I've cut out the anchor wells.   yes they are not symmetrical but taper upwards and the top edge goes on a slant.

I thought it looked wrong, but that's what the plans say.  The anchor will be tilted when pulled up into the recess.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on February 20, 2017, 11:14:24 pm
Hi Ken - re the motors....
 
I don't know the full specs of your model (weight, draft etc.), but our Norland prototype weighs in at about 13.5kg (nearly 30lbs) and moves very well with a couple of 555's spinning 40mm brass Raboesch props on 12v.  I don't know if there is enough room in your hull for the number of 555's you would need, but they are slowish revving motors with plenty of torque.
 
Just my observations....
 
Carl  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 22, 2017, 10:59:31 am

Thanks for input Carl.  It looks like 500 series route for me.

That could be sometime off as I am now up to  'Plating the hull'.  I have the details of every rivet and plan to spend some time getting them in the right places.....  My new  'Specs'  have been built and paid for  (wow)  and I can see better than ever now.     :}

Here are the latest hull flattening pictures.  Please don't go on the colour arrangements as she is flat all over which is ideal for the plating to be fitted and the half million rivets yet to be done.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: cos918 on February 22, 2017, 07:18:43 pm
HI Ken
My Finnjet ferry is running 550 motors on 12v on 40mm props X2 . She can go slow and has a good turn of speed . These would work very well for you as a 35 mm prop would reduce load and current pull . Carl mentioned the 555 which also would work well. Note when buying a motor check out the specks as there are several version of each type of motor. Here is a link to two 555 motor . the specks are not the same


john


 http://www.robotshop.com/uk/rs-555-12v-7750-rpm-brushed-dc-motor.html
http://www.componentshop.co.uk/mabuchi-555-dc-motor-mounting-bracket.html?___SID=U
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 22, 2017, 08:47:29 pm

Thank you for info John.

I have been over to see the site.  I have bookmarked my  'basket' and am seriously thinking about this.  What's their delivery system like for time of arriving please.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on February 22, 2017, 09:07:35 pm
Mine are the Mabuchi variety from Component Shop  :-))
And delivery is usually next day from order - if ordered at a sensible time of the day obviously!
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 22, 2017, 09:28:42 pm

Thanks Carl.  Their price seems to more than twice the other company's.  I probably won't be sailing much and as I need 4, this would make it an expensive business.  I also have to order 4 props and matching shafts, and we all know how expensive these are.

I'll let you know how I get on.

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 22, 2017, 10:26:24 pm
While 4 motors and 4 props is the conventional solution, an alternative option might be to use belt drive with 2 motors each driving 2 shafts. It has been done before.


Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 23, 2017, 09:29:03 am

Colin.  I do like that idea.  It would reduce the  'back end'  weight as well.

Does anyone know where might I get this 'gear set up' please. ?

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Plastic - RIP on February 23, 2017, 09:52:23 am
The QM propellers were 20' diameter so that equates to 30mm @ 1/200 scale.

Why not just go low tech with 4x 385 motors driving long 2mm shafts via rubber tube couplings with 2 speed controllers driving 2 motors each? You can get them down low in the hull and silicone them in for simplicity. A 6V SLA  gives ballast and long endurance.

The motors are a couple of quid on ebay and it's a simple installation without mucking about with belts in confined spaces.

They provide plenty of power - I have only 3 driving my 1/200 Titanic perfectly well.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 23, 2017, 10:11:47 am

Thank you for the input, plastic.

I've just been looking at gears and decided it was overkill.  I'm thinking of just two motors now and having the other two props free-wheeling.  (inside or outside ---- which is best)
 
The idea is to use 12 volts throughout the ship so I should have a bit of spare  'power' as a get out of trouble system with larger motors.

Now working on the  'plating' and have succeeded in slicing the top of my finger with the Stanley knife  (again !!)  That will slow me down a bit.   %)

Back to the TV watching.

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 23, 2017, 04:59:14 pm
Ken, if it is possible to teminate all the shafts at the same position within the hull using different lengths for the inners and outers then you could mount pulleys on each shaft and link the two shafts on each side together with an elastic driving band. Then just drive one of the shafts on each side with a motor.

If you choose to freewheel it is difficult to advise. The inner shafts will be more responsive to the rudder, the outers will be better for tank steering responsiveness.

Colin




Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Plastic - RIP on February 23, 2017, 05:14:26 pm
Ken, if it is possible to teminate all the shafts at the same position within the hull using different lengths for the inners and outers then you could mount pulleys on each shaft and link the two shafts on each side together with an elastic driving band. Then just drive one of the shafts on each side with a motor.

If you choose to freewheel it is difficult to advise. The inner shafts will be more responsive to the rudder, the outers will be better for tank steering responsiveness.

Colin


I'd be careful about that - At 1/200 scale, 2mm propshafts are about the right size. Rubber band drive cannot transmit a lot of torque unless the band is very tight - which will but a huge side-load into the shaft bearings causing leaks or premature failure.

Toothed belts would better but still put a huge side-load on the shaft.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on February 23, 2017, 05:32:34 pm
Just about all my boats use plain belt drive and always have. Never had a problem with it whether 2mm or 4mm. No need to make the belt too tight, it just increases power consumption.


With a motor to shaft drive the tension can be adjusted by slightly moving the motor mounting. Between two shafts you can introduce a small adjustable tensioner pulley.


The whole point is to turn the drive pulley, not tug it against its bearing. Works OK on millions of car fan and accessory belts, works on models too!


Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: cos918 on February 23, 2017, 07:55:09 pm
Thank you for the input, plastic.

I've just been looking at gears and decided it was overkill.  I'm thinking of just two motors now and having the other two props free-wheeling.  (inside or outside ---- which is best)
 
The idea is to use 12 volts throughout the ship so I should have a bit of spare  'power' as a get out of trouble system with larger motors.

Now working on the  'plating' and have succeeded in slicing the top of my finger with the Stanley knife  (again !!)  That will slow me down a bit.   %)

Back to the TV watching.

ken


Ken power the outer pair would be best . The cost between 2 motor and 4 motors is not a lot . If i was you I would go for 4


john
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 23, 2017, 08:22:49 pm
Go careful Ken, model making is difficult without fingers unless you go sculptural and freeform:O)

For your mammoth rivett-o-thon, are you embossing the rivets into the back of plates before fitting them as adding single ones will be tedious and I fear you would forever be adding replacement ones as and when they are knocked off by annoyingly light impacts.

She is starting to look the part  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 23, 2017, 09:23:01 pm

Thanks for the inputs fellas.

I plan to use 4mm shafts as the couplings between will present no problems to the motors.   Also I might go with the original idea of 4 motors driving 4 bladed props. There's plenty of room.

The rivets will be punched from the back to produce a line of domes on the outside surface of half m/m plastic sheet. I'm thinking of a parallel bed of blunted nails in a stationary drill press.  Sort of mass production.

 I have today continued with my cutting of the plating into lengths.  Would you believe I used the band saw for a perfect parallel edge.  Much better than a Stanley knife against a ruler.   %)

Cheers
ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 23, 2017, 09:47:27 pm
I don't blame you Ken as it will be a tedious job even for the most avid modeller. Your embossing tool idea has  merit especially if you make a few of differing lengths to maximise on ease of operation.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: SailorGreg on February 24, 2017, 09:08:15 am

 I have today continued with my cutting of the plating into lengths.  Would you believe I used the band saw for a perfect parallel edge.  Much better than a Stanley knife against a ruler.   %)

Cheers
ken


Yeah - four fingertips in one go!   {-)


For producing the rivets, have you considered using a ponce (or pounce) wheel?

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 24, 2017, 10:27:20 am
 
Yes Greg,  automation will have to come into it due to the quantity required. (2000 might not even be enough !)   I am looking into methods at the moment of automating this.  Wheels and power press come to mind.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Plastic - RIP on February 24, 2017, 02:52:59 pm
Why not get a sewing machine and grind the needle length until in becomes a dent-maker rather than piercing the material?

There is stitch size adjustment and auto index - you can run a long lengths of material through it and then cut the individual plates from the long length - fully automated rivet plate manufacturing.

It should work great on plasticard or cardboard. Have the whole lot produced in a few minutes.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Capt Podge on February 24, 2017, 04:46:13 pm
Why not get a sewing machine and grind the needle length until in becomes a dent-maker

Sorry for butting in but that sounds like a great idea O0

Also, the possibility of using this method on litho-plate could be explored. :-)

Regards,

Ray.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 24, 2017, 05:03:40 pm

Great idea Plastic.  I'm sure the members will pick up on this.

We don't have a sewing machine so I've gone for a 'rounded off' large nail and fitted in the pillar drill.  I've pulled the plug out and set it up as a press.  I marked out a piece of wood for the drill vice and adjusted the throw to just press on the plastic strip without puncturing it.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 24, 2017, 05:09:14 pm

I then cut loads of half mm plasticard into strips 10 mm wide.  After marking out distance marks I set too and started pressing the dimples into the plastic strips.

I have done 1400 imitation rivets so far and broke off for the day.  I have placed some onto the hull to give an impression but the camera doesn't show white dots on white plastic very well.    :}

I am pleased with the result and when my arm is rested  (muscle ache !!) I shall be back tomorrow for another batch.

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 24, 2017, 09:04:25 pm
They show up really well Ken, worry ye not about that.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 25, 2017, 11:06:20 am

Thanks 'B' ,  it's all interesting stuff. I only need 6000 more rivets  (he says).  I'm certainly going to count them when I've finished.

The portholes will have to be drilled when they are affixed to the hull.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on February 25, 2017, 08:46:43 pm
Can you mark the centres before fitting the plates Ken? I plated my destroyer today and marked out the positions and centre marked the portholes before gluing the styrene strips on. I didn't do rivets though!


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 26, 2017, 10:21:05 am

Hi Ballastanksian.  There are plans afoot to mark out the positions of the plates as I have several sizes and shapes to contend with, along with different designs of them.  2 rivets and three rivets in lines, which makes it hard on the eyes to work out.  I will be showing this as I go along

Yesterday was one continual punching on them rivets.  I think I'm through the hard graft now and need to get some more Evostick ready for 'sticking on' time..

Below are some pictures of the  production plant used in the process.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 26, 2017, 10:27:00 am

The band saw, set up with protecting sheet of wood cut to blade size.  This saves the half mm plastic being torn downwards and gives a smooth cut which is parallel.  I used to use a Stanley knife but I've only got ten fingers and already had several warnings.   :}
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 26, 2017, 10:47:23 am
Here's the punched out pieces.  The plastic strips are fed by hand along the length one at a time to the marks.

One strip produces 160 rivet indents.  Gets boring and achy after 3 hours and then dinner and back for another 2 hours.  30 strips so far.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: BFSMP on February 26, 2017, 12:18:12 pm

Thanks 'B' ,  it's all interesting stuff. I only need 6000 more rivets  (he says).  I'm certainly going to count them when I've finished.

The portholes will have to be drilled when they are affixed to the hull.

ken


Ken,


neil showed me this little gismo that he made some years ago and sent me the pictures to post you.........made of old clock cogs, a bit of brass and a chisel handle.
Save you a whole heap of time. and every rivet evenly spaced.


Jim.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 26, 2017, 12:30:17 pm

Thanks Jim,

I tried making one years ago and failed when making my Titanic.  I found the results uneven, so abandoned the idea. The tool has the variants of hand movements, so the depth and straightness of the line could not equal the precision of a sturdy fixed machine process.

Looking back, I wished I had made a dual press so that the 'rivets' were always parallel in line.  I don't suppose it will show much at this scale anyway when painted.

Cheers

ken


 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on February 26, 2017, 12:58:14 pm
Hi Ken
 have a look at this build of the Spider j by Gareth Jones and see how he achieved putting the rivet indents in the plastic strips.

http://www.modelboats.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=98007&p=10

john
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Brian60 on February 26, 2017, 02:56:08 pm
I used to use a Stanley knife but I've only got ten fingers and already had several warnings.   :}


10 fingers {-) {-) {-) {-) Think you mean 8 fingers and 2 thumbs mate, although in hindsight I think like me, at times you feel like you have all thumbs  %% %% %% %%
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on February 26, 2017, 08:34:49 pm

Thank you for the link John.  I went over and had a read.  I'm glad I've got the job done now as it was a daunting experience.  I had punched 5400 dimples.   %%

Brian ..... stop talking about fingers.  It's still throbbing now it's dried out and crusty.    argh!!!!!.     ok2

I did a count and the rivet total is 5400. That's a lot of punching one at a time.   I had to go out,  so no work on her today.

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 01, 2017, 10:06:46 am

Finished riveting .......... are we ever finished with anything ?

The count is now up to 7000+.    O0

I have fitted most of the strips to the hull now by using Evostick, and it's really stuck them down.  I tried removing  a strip after a day and broke the plastic, so I feel confident they will stay there during any voyages.

Here's the latest view from last night and I'm planning to remove the sticky tape today and fit a few doors.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on March 01, 2017, 12:18:27 pm
They do look rather prominent Ken, how big would they be if you scale them up?

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 01, 2017, 08:19:33 pm
They do appear a little large.

Here's a picture of the real ship.  I might flatten mine down a bit, but hoping the paints will reduce the illusion a bit more. I don't plan to put as many as the real ship.   :o

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 01, 2017, 10:12:24 pm
Even putting 1/10th of the real number of rivets on the model by any method would be an epic project. You would have to be in real enthusiasm heaven to attempt it.

From a few feet away, they will look the part and then like most models, from fifty feet away they will disappear into the general Queen Maryish shape sailing on the pond. If there was a simpler way of getting a reasonable percentage of the real number on, then I would say go for it.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on March 02, 2017, 08:46:01 am
I've considered just putting the vertical rows of rivet on my QM They appear more prominent than the horizontal rows and would be easier to do.  I've been experimenting with a laser cut tool and an old embossing press.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 06, 2017, 10:03:17 am

I'm still working on  'them rivets'.

I have sanded down the hull  (lightly) to reduce their height and it's come out rather well.

The other problem in the illusion stakes was that the strips were not staggered to give the illusion of plating.  I ended up with a vertical line of joins.  To this end I cut out sections between the joins and fitted new strips to stagger them across the width of the hull.  I think it looks better on the eye now.

I have made the side panels from 1mm plastic for the upper deck which involved a few hundred  windows being drilled and some square ones being filed out.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 06, 2017, 09:08:05 pm
That is an epic window marathon Ken.

Looking good  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Peter Fitness on March 06, 2017, 09:15:10 pm
You should now have some sympathy for the riveters who helped to build the real thing, Ken {-)


Peter.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 06, 2017, 11:10:21 pm

I've got SPOTS in front of my eyes.     {-)     {-)

A nice sitting down job without the ear noise, Peter

There are loads of doors as well,  coming through the production line.

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on March 07, 2017, 09:28:07 am
I've got SPOTS in front of my eyes.     {-)     {-)

A nice sitting down job without the ear noise, Peter

There are loads of doors as well,  coming through the production line.

ken

Are they all the same size / appearance Ken?  Take a look at my Norland post......quite happy to bang them out in card on the laser for you if it will save your sanity  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 07, 2017, 10:09:42 am

Thanks for the offer Carl.  There are 20 doors around 10x4 MM, all cut ready for gluing on, so no problem there.  I have to cut inserts into the strip riveting so that they lie flat against the hull in the gaps.  Looks good from a distance, so can't wait to cover the lot in black paint.  I'm hoping to cover the myriad of faults   %)

Cheers
ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 13, 2017, 03:29:24 pm
All the rivets and windows have now been produced and we have started gluing the plates onto the hull.

Here is a picture of the doors.  Here's some of the 20 doors.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 13, 2017, 03:32:14 pm

The stern area side plates were drilled and filed for the long windows and more portholes. 

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 13, 2017, 03:34:23 pm

Took the opportunity of the warm weather and applied another coat of Red Oxide paint.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 13, 2017, 03:37:47 pm
Final piece of the window plating jigsaw was the stern section.  This was glued into place.

I have made a stand from clear plastic to keep the base off the workshop bench and stopping scratching my paintwork.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 13, 2017, 08:59:08 pm
She is becoming an epic build ken! What therapies do you use to get over porthole drilling?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 14, 2017, 09:44:08 am
Quote
She is becoming an epic build ken! What therapies do you use to get over porthole drilling?


All very therapeutic .   :}

As they say in  'Playschool' .....  now it's over to the square windows.   %)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on March 14, 2017, 11:44:52 am
I love how you manage to express your mood while drilling the portholes.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 15, 2017, 09:17:56 pm
 :}

Today I started fitting the prop shafts.  After a lot of fiddling I've come up with larger holes than I'd wanted.  I cannot get the tubes to lie any lower due to the hull shape and the steep walls.

I have made my own motor shelves and lined it up as best and as low as possible. Will glass it in when I'm satisfied all is well.



 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 15, 2017, 10:04:37 pm
As long as you can cruise the lakes of the UK gracefully, I see no problem. The holes might need filling though  :D
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on March 16, 2017, 12:05:47 am
Hullo Ken.....I did not realise that Mary had pairs of contra rotating individual propellers on both Port & Stdb sides?...or were they all installed by the Irish dockyard team on nightshift ;)

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 16, 2017, 09:37:01 am

What can I say  ...............................   I love you both.    {-)     {-)



ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on March 16, 2017, 09:55:23 am
Actually it makes perfect sense. The model is so big that Ken will have to sail her on the spot. (Which also makes it easier to count the rivets).

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: JimG on March 16, 2017, 12:06:41 pm
Plenty of opportunity for weathering the finish and adding rust and flaking paint if you want to represent her present state.

http://photos.presstelegram.com/2017/03/photos-queen-mary-is-in-dire-need-of-repairs/#1 (http://photos.presstelegram.com/2017/03/photos-queen-mary-is-in-dire-need-of-repairs/#1)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: warspite on March 16, 2017, 07:01:23 pm
Drilling so many holes he even managed to subconsciously drill what he was feeling further to the right (3rd and 2nd from right)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 20, 2017, 08:20:01 pm
I have been working on the blocks to support the prop tubes and have designed these.

props reversed for amusement.    :}


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 20, 2017, 08:23:38 pm
After gluing into position and filling the little gaps in the hull, here is the final look.  The edges have been sanded down smooth and red oxide applied.




Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 21, 2017, 08:25:07 pm
Bloomin heck, you will win the blue riband if just for the speed you are building her Ken!
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 22, 2017, 09:16:49 am

Thanks Ian.  Just finished the rudder but have no servos in stock.   :((

Pictures to follow as I'm going out today on a service call for Hammond organs.  (if I can remember how they work !)    tehe

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 23, 2017, 09:44:02 pm
Now that is interesting. can you play or are you just good at making them work?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on March 24, 2017, 08:51:22 am
So you can fix one of these but you baulked at all those rivets.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 24, 2017, 09:39:15 am
Now that is interesting. can you play or are you just good at making them work?

I did learn a tune or two.   ;)  Although I don't have one myself, when I'd finished the repair, I automatically went into play mode.  It made me wish I had one of my own but my wife hates them and won't have one in the house.

That's a nice condition Tone generator, TailUK.  Never saw one this good in all my 30 years.

One of the last one I 'did' was when they dropped the organ whilst unloading it outside the venue, for a concert in Cardiff with Brian Adams. (keys akimbo etc !)


On with the build ............  I have fitted the new rudder and linkages and lined up the servo, which was seized !!   so new ones on order.
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 24, 2017, 09:44:09 am
I have made the motor brackets and fitted 4  (yes four) 550 motors which I had left over from truck building.  These are rated for 7.2 volts and run fast, so the plan is to run them through a speed controller at 6 volts with a reduced voltage via the radio percentage control.  If needed  (by increasing the power)  the captain can go water skiing when he wants to. There will be a choice of running just two motors for gentle cruising and saving battery life.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on March 24, 2017, 05:43:03 pm
Hi ya Kenny, the model is coming along great.  Can a make a gentle suggestion - your prop tube supports where they come to the end of the prop tube - you have them flat - are you proposing to taper them in a little bit (the shape of a wing) as if you leave them flat like you have done - they may cause turbulence - and you will lose a lot of performance from your model.   The other thing is - remember - the comment made about your props where you have one left hand/one right handed one - on the same side of the ship - well here is a pic I found and its from the link I put on about South Tyneside Archives and its of the RMS Mauretania = have a look at the props :-)

John
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on March 24, 2017, 08:21:02 pm
Actually Ken, that is a pretty valid comment about the propshaft fairings leading to the props.
As it is at the moment, you are running the risk of actually blanking the props entirely by the structure of the fairings - the props themselves are not much bigger than the end area of the fairings.  Would suggest you remove the props and sand the fairings down so that they feather to the size closer to the shaft diameter where they meet the prop to allow the water to flow smoothly around the fairing and into the prop itself.
Looking cracking in any case mate!!!
Carl  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 24, 2017, 08:30:12 pm

Hiya John.  Thanks for the information. It would be no problem to round the edges.  I am assuming you mean to curve the edges  inwards towards the tubes.  ?

The  Mauretania  picture does suggest opposing props between front and back tubes on each side.  I have  'rigged'  mine to be equal in line and opposite to the other side.  When I start water testing and to save Amps, I plan to use the rear pair only,  which are opposed for better running.

Thanks for the input Carl.  Obviously a major problem indeed so I shall taper them down to meet the tube.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on March 24, 2017, 09:05:04 pm
Stern photo of QM:

https://yooniqimages.com/images/detail/102117963/Creative/photograph-of-the-stern-of-r-m-s-queen-mary-whilst-she-was-in-dry-dock-to-have-her-hull-repainted-and-her-four-propellors-changed-each-propellor-on-the-luxury-cunard-white-star-liner-weighed-approximately-35-tons

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 24, 2017, 09:17:02 pm

Thank you Colin.  Will replicate this.

Had a fun day trying to make the anchor recesses.  What a horrible design, I must say.  Still haven't finished it as I'm trying to get it to look right. Angles all over the place  !!

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 24, 2017, 09:23:19 pm
You'll get there ken. What with modifying the fairings, setting the props and getting the anchor recesses right, she will be a thouroughbred.

Have you retired from the model truck world now?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 24, 2017, 09:30:05 pm

Thanks Ian,  she very interesting and the time passes so quickly.

I still have the Tamiya truck range on the shelves.  I have something else to occupy my mind at the moment.   %)   busy me.  However.... you never know.

Cheers

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 26, 2017, 10:36:15 am

Modifications well underway.   After a bit of sanding and smoothing here is the final result.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 27, 2017, 10:17:05 am

It's time to move up a deck.  We are now up to the  (what will be called) removable section, which is deck B.  This is quite a long sectioned piece which has over 300 square windows down each side.

I spent a quiet Sunday punching them out with my specially made punch and die.  I now have to make a smaller punch for the tiny windows to fit above the 300 already made.  I need my eyes tested again.     %)

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 27, 2017, 08:14:53 pm
Another jig was made and smaller windows have been punched into these strips and they now look like this.  That makes it double the amount of holes.   

This batch were quite small, as can be seen by the coin next to them. One of the passengers fell through a window.      O0





Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 27, 2017, 08:19:55 pm

Decks A and B were cut out and laid on board, so we are up to the top deck at last.

The window strips will be joining these two decks together and will be the access point to the innards.  We should be able to lift the top section off for maintenance.

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 27, 2017, 09:27:37 pm
Thats the ticket  :-)) I like the element of model engineering to your model, with making the tools to stamp windows and the like. For the window that a passenger fell through  {:-{ a strip of styrene will fix that in seconds.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 27, 2017, 09:34:50 pm

Why didn't I think of that.     8)

Excellent suggestion.  It'll be done on tomorrow's shift Guv.

cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 29, 2017, 10:14:40 am

Windows all repaired.  What a tiny surgical job that was.  !!  Looks much better now.   :-))

I have glued the two decks  (A & B ) together with the correct spacing in between and secured the windows all down each side.  Quite a massive structure but now very firm and removable.  I shall be able to lift this top off completely for some internal access  (lakeside !!)

Today I'm going to collect my 22 lifeboats from my friend Mark at MMB model makers.  They should look nice, laid out across the sides of my new deck.

Here's last nights picture of it all still in bandages.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 29, 2017, 05:18:09 pm

We now have Marks Model bits version of the lifeboats.

Great result .................... :}     I have laid them out unpainted for an overall view onto the deck.

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Hellboy Paul on March 29, 2017, 09:23:57 pm
The build & lifeboats look good... Just need 48 davits now.... That will keep you busy for a bit...


Paul..
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on March 29, 2017, 09:31:22 pm
That deck piece looks good Ken, as do the boats. Nicely cast  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 29, 2017, 09:41:09 pm

Thanks fellas.   :}

A little tip when gluing plastic card together .................. If using masking tape to hold the joint together,  try and remove the tape as soon as it's safe to do so without the joint failing.   If you leave the tape on the join overnight then you can  expect it to be welded to the plastic surfaces the next day.

It will ruin the surface when removed and necessitate a light sanding to restore the surface.  ................    Ask me how I know  !!!!    %%      %%

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: missyd on March 30, 2017, 03:06:26 pm
I like the way you build the QM!  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 31, 2017, 09:46:15 am

Thank you missyd.  I am enjoying the challenge.  Millions of problems.   ok2

ken

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on March 31, 2017, 10:51:27 am
Could we get a better look at your lifeboats?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 31, 2017, 10:56:13 am
My pleasure.  I'll be down the workshop later.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 31, 2017, 07:47:23 pm

Here you go.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on March 31, 2017, 07:51:48 pm

Today I made the rear deck cabin.   Just the windows (again) to do.  I wish I had cut them before fitting it together as it makes them harder to do.

I have also cut some funnels and just placed them on for the picture.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 02, 2017, 09:27:56 am

Well, I was right about the windows.  I had to strip the cabin apart back into flat pieces for the window department to punch holes in it  !!

The shape this time is quite a tall windows and there's loads of em ! 

Here she is all re-glued together and placed in situ next to my little man at 200 scale.  A bit of sanding smooth and a coat of paint might be needed.   %)

   
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 03, 2017, 04:23:22 pm

I didn't like the quality of those windows so have made a new stern building.  This involved making another larger punch set and re-cutting the windows to be taller.



 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 04, 2017, 06:15:19 pm

Today I spent some time  smartening up the cabin.  I have fitted the ventilation unit to the roof and punched the extra windows in the sides.

I have started production of the fresh air vents.  These take a while to make from plastic card and there is 8 of them altogether.   %)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on April 04, 2017, 08:58:45 pm
Look on the bright side ken, they are square in section and not round! I am a coward and will always buy cowl vents.

She is coming along nicely.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 07, 2017, 05:20:23 pm
I have been busy  'painting up'  'Marks Model Boats' version that he's made for me. 

22 large ones and 2 small ones,  along with his mouldings of the Davits.  What a splendid job he's made of them.

They have been undercoated and drying in the sun.  You have to squint your eyes to work out the colour illusion but they do jump out at you eventually  :}

They are on Ebay if anyone else wants some.   Cheers Mark.

ken


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on April 07, 2017, 08:39:43 pm
I salute you for your efforts and tolerating all the repetition of finishing the fine details  :-)) These will make Queen Mary look brilliant.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 07, 2017, 08:43:59 pm
Thanks Ian.   I've just been out and sprayed the davits on one side with undercoat.  They can go on drying while I sleep.     %)

Here's the rest of the lifeboats.


ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 10, 2017, 08:46:43 pm

Back to the rear cabins , topside.  I have re-made them (yet again) to increase their width so that they line up with the Davits to the deck edge.

It was only 2 mm, each side,  but it did not align correctly, and spoilt the look.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 12, 2017, 08:18:41 pm

The time has come to put the decks onto the stern area.  There are three decks and various doorways and walls to calculate. Here they are laid into place to give a general idea of the shapes involved.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on April 12, 2017, 08:27:53 pm
Those funnels don't look quite right to me Ken, are you going to do some more work on them?

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 12, 2017, 08:37:39 pm

Hi Colin.

They are only ex drainpipes placed on to give a better illusion for the picture.  I have the drawings and measurements,  so it should look better next time.   :}

Just a quick question, if I may.

There are a lot of stairways to upper floors on the outsides of the ship moored in America and I was wondering if some might have been added for visitor traffic flow  ?

ken


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on April 12, 2017, 08:44:22 pm
Ken,

Yes, there are quite a lot of access points which have been added since the ship arrived at Long Beach. There is also a new gangway crossing the forward well deck which was not a part of the original vessel and simply serves to give access to the bow of the ship. You should reference your plans rather than the photos for a lot of the detail.

Incidentally the funnels on the ship at the moment are stainless steel replicas, the originals had corroded too much to be restored!

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 12, 2017, 08:47:38 pm

Thank you Colin,

I figured as much, hence my question.  The bow one sure makes her look ugly. 

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 14, 2017, 08:01:18 pm

I've now started with the top decks and secured them down at the stern.

There are more rooms to build all along the deck and these support the funnels and other features.  Here is a mock up so far.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on April 15, 2017, 08:25:22 pm
Is that a form of flying bridge Kenny?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on April 15, 2017, 09:05:34 pm
That is the after docking bridge. An officer was stationed there with a telephone to the bridge to keep the captain informed of what the other end of the ship was doing when coming alongside and undocking.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 17, 2017, 09:47:22 am

As the weather has now improved I thought I'd try a little paint spraying.

The first coat of white has been applied and is drying nicely out in the sun.  Work has now shifted to the funnels.  These are made from plastic tubes which have been elongated into an egg shape and capped, top and bottom. the bands were fitted and after undercoating, they have been painted with the first colour.  today we will apply the black tops.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 18, 2017, 10:00:55 am
Moving up  'forwrd'  I have started on the curved floors for the fronts of each deck.  This involved a bit more window cutting and curving the plastic card to shape.

The funnels have been 'shaped'  by fitting a thick oblong sheet of plastic inside to make the correct size. The bands around them were fitted.  They were then primed and the first coat of red was applied.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Paul2407 on April 18, 2017, 11:37:26 am
This is an epic build ken and one that will test your skills but it's looking great so far, keep up the great work I can't wait to see this progress further and onto the finished item  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: chipchase on April 18, 2017, 01:37:41 pm
Those funnels certainly set her off Kenny  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 19, 2017, 09:47:21 am

Thank you.  She's certainly proving a challenge. 

Every time I look at the drawings and pictures I find more to think about.   ok2

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on April 19, 2017, 09:24:57 pm
Thanks for the information Colin.

Keep up the good work, she is coming along really nicely Ken.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 21, 2017, 08:20:14 pm
Further painting on the funnels completed, and then we set about building the front end of the cabin structures.  More windows were created and plastic bent to shape for the different sizes of the floors.

it will be tidied up after we get them correctly lined up.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 21, 2017, 08:24:51 pm
Believe me when I say this was not easy.

As the sun was out I took the opportunity of spraying out side.  The lifeboats were given their second coats along with the davits.  I'm using 'Appliance white' as it is the brightest white of all the tins.

They are actually the same colour but one set of pictures was indoors and the other was outside.   %)






Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Peter Fitness on April 21, 2017, 11:16:56 pm
That's most impressive Ken, she's really starting to come together now :-))  She should look magnificent on the water. O0


Peter.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 22, 2017, 10:56:36 am

Thanks Peter.

Just had a look her this morning.  Isn't it amazing that when you go back to it the next day you see all the faults and wonder why you did certain things 'that' way.

Another day of corrections coming up.    :}

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: cos918 on April 22, 2017, 07:45:11 pm
Ken
she is coming on well . Your funnel appear to be straight . On the real ship they were racked back a bit .


john
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 23, 2017, 10:19:03 am

Hi John.

It's OK,  they are tilted.  I'm afraid the camera does not pick this up,  so I'll re-photograph it later.

I'm finally up the to the flying wing bridges assembly and feeling quite excited about it.  It's the main feature so I want to get it right.   :-)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 24, 2017, 03:34:31 pm

Hello John,

YOU WERE RIGHT .     :embarrassed:

I painted them upside DOWN.

This is what this club is all about.. Thank you for pointing it out.  I have re sprayed the black part red and look forward to painting the other end black.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 24, 2017, 03:38:37 pm

Whilst the paint is drying I have got on with the bridge decks.  What a nightmare in curvatures and bonding glues. 

I think we are getting somewhere near a recognisable ship now. Only one more cabin to do 'up top'.  (The bit they steer from)   :}

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Netleyned on April 24, 2017, 04:07:28 pm
Hello John,

YOU WERE RIGHT .     :embarrassed:

I painted them upside DOWN.

This is what this club is all about.. Thank you for pointing it out.  I have re sprayed the black part red and look forward to painting the other end black.


And the smoke goes up the chimney just the same %% %%
Keep up the good work Ken, it's looking
really good.
The little setbacks will be overcome and the end result will be stunning.


Ned
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 27, 2017, 09:03:05 pm

Amazing how much time is spent with nothing to show for it.  mmmh!

 I have been busy trying to make the upper works and finally come up with another cabin to fit between the pillars.  This one has a tennis court behind it but in front of the first funnel.  More balls please !!!  Just one more to go before we reach the top.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tafelspitz on April 29, 2017, 07:04:59 pm
This is so amazing, I really love and adore your work on this epic build!
I can't even imagine how much work this all is, building from scratch.


(http://rs982.pbsrc.com/albums/ae301/EarlyMemphis/Smileys-Animated/Bow.gif~c200)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 30, 2017, 09:51:47 am

Well thank you for that, ' big T'.  I really am enjoying this build.  With so much to do and so much analysis of pictures from all over the world, it really is a B***** getting all the correct details.

I have pictures of the real ship from it's birth to it's present day construction that conflict each other  Her design changes all the time and I so want it to be right, as this might be my last build.

I have been working on the features and adding things I didn't know existed. It's all great fun  (and expense) so if you'll permit, I have the following pictures  where I went mad with the camera.


If you see any flaws, they will be  'smoothed out when the man with the  'filler'  comes around.   Please be gentle as I welcome all comments.

Here we go then ...........................





Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 30, 2017, 09:53:57 am
Continuing with the marathon ............................. :}

The Staff are coming on board so I have fit some railings.        {-)


Scheesh,  these people are tiny.   These Nav lights are fitted for fun.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Paul2407 on April 30, 2017, 10:36:26 am
This along with HMS illustrious are my 2 favourite builds on here the level of detail both of you are doing is fantastic and far beyond my skills, keep the posts coming they are fantastic seeing the progress
Thank you for sharing  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on April 30, 2017, 10:42:57 am
Thank you Paul.  The final picture above with the little man is standing on a deck that is as high as my thumb is sideways.      :}   Sorry about the wonky windows.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Paul2407 on April 30, 2017, 10:57:32 am
Wonky windows didn't even notice  ok2  and I bet they are not all straight on the real ship
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 01, 2017, 08:18:36 pm

Me and Mary have been out in the sun for an application of some red paint.  I've just put a light wash on and will let it harden off over night.

Whilst the paint was drying I have started fixing down the attachments that I've made.  The giant air filters are now on.  The curved roof over the Ballroom/ Cinema has been secured and I have measured up for the lifeboat fittings.   

It's getting exciting now the hard labour in the windows department has finished.
 :}


:}

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 01, 2017, 09:56:46 pm
Crewkerne antiques centre has a seven foot long model of Canberra in their front window at the moment, and when ever I go past the window I stop and look at it and it reminds me of your build. Your over all finish of build is much better and obviously you will be able to move it without several burley friends!

She's looking fab Mr Ken  :-)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 01, 2017, 10:03:02 pm

Thank you kind Sir.   

I'm beginning to get somewhere now all the little bits have been constructed

Lifeboats tomorrow.   Anyone know what colour the covers are please. I'm thinking war time green  ???

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 01, 2017, 10:13:25 pm
Lifeboat covers would normally have been white canvas.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 01, 2017, 10:14:11 pm
Thank you kind Sir.   

I'm beginning to get somewhere now all the little bits have been constructed

Lifeboats tomorrow.   Anyone know what colour the covers are please. I'm thinking war time green  ???

ken

Though not the sharpest or closest images, this video does suggest a dark colour, possibly green?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfGOP2yMfN0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfGOP2yMfN0)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 01, 2017, 10:43:34 pm
The Anatomy of the Ship book has a 1951 aerial photo showing some of the boats with white covers and some without covers.

The big model in Southampton Maritime Museum has white covers.

That is not to say that green covers might not have been fitted at other times.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 02, 2017, 09:26:15 am

Thank you for your replies lads.  The trouble is that all the top section is white at the moment  (except the funnels).  The lifeboats  and davits (moulded by Marks model bits) are also white.  I think the scene needs breaking up a bit with a distraction shade.  Nothing bold or garish but a subtle change on the eye and it looks like dark green may be the way to go.

My red tin of Halfords spray paint has failed, in that it is spitting  (not feathers !) but the paint is coming out in blobs  ??  I shall be going out for a replacement yet again.  It's the second tin failure from them this year alone. Good job they are pretty calm about a replacement with no fuss.

Cheers

ken


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 04, 2017, 10:07:19 am

I have given the lower hull another coat of red and it's coming out alright.


The  'Elves'  have been fitting the lifeboat davits   :D   and the top decks are filling up with railings.   The lifeboats now have green canvas tops. 

How to fit  them to the davits with ropes seems a major problem as the pulley's would be very small indeed.  Any ideas chaps  ?


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: JimG on May 04, 2017, 11:07:36 am
At this scale a proper pulley system would look too coarse. Just use a single line from the davit to the lifeboat, possibly single strand copper wire of a suitable diameter. If you want to show blocks then a small drop of PVA glue on the line could be used. Once dried it can be painted a suitable colour.

Jim
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Plastic - RIP on May 04, 2017, 12:56:51 pm
This is starting to look awesome. Looking forward to seeing the completed model.  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: raflaunches on May 04, 2017, 01:40:58 pm
You've got some patience there Ken!
Fantastic work, she's going to look amazing when she's finished! :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tafelspitz on May 04, 2017, 03:19:36 pm
Awesome work and I admire your patience with all these repetitive tasks you're facing with your build.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: BFSMP on May 04, 2017, 04:54:18 pm

I can only reiterate what the other gents have said. This is looking quite superb.


Jim.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 04, 2017, 08:27:34 pm

Thanks for all the kind comments.  She is coming along well at the moment.

I like your idea of the copper wire Jim.   :-))  It would stay in place, better than cotton or string.  First I have to fit the railings all along the sides of the deck below the lifeboats.   It's  'handle more carefully'  for the rest of the ships life after this.  You can see the 'N' gauge fences on the top deck. They don't bend too well !

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Peter Fitness on May 04, 2017, 10:42:54 pm
Ken, Bob Wilson, miniature model ship builder extraordinaire, uses very thin copper wire for the rigging of his tiny model sailing ships, so it should suit your purpose admirably. Just give it a gentle stretch between two pairs of pliers or similar to make it straight.


QM is looking marvellous.


Peter.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 05, 2017, 09:57:37 am

Thanks Peter.  I will have a go on this.

Nice and sunny today so it's out with the Black paint in the garden.   {-)

ken

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 05, 2017, 09:14:35 pm

Can you tell what it is yet  ?    %)





Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 05, 2017, 09:19:37 pm

That's the black now on.  Second coat to come tomorrow.

I was not happy with the dull green on the lifeboat covers  (post 261)  so decided to hand paint them blue. I think it looks better now as the green had a drab shade to it and it didn't look right.  I noticed there was blue cover on the real ship in America.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Bob K on May 05, 2017, 10:24:20 pm
She is looking better and better as you progress.  Well done  :-))

I am sure the sheer repetitiveness of some of your detail work may seem tedious at times, but the collective effect will be awesome.

Bob K
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 08, 2017, 10:09:20 am
The wraps are off.       :-))

He's her first visit out into the sun shine.

Since the photos, I have cleaned up the paint bleed along the colour joins.  (naff tape I suppose !)

Time to make some fences.  I have found some suitable 'Wire' in my stores that used to be key contacts for electronic organs.  They are quite sturdy considering they are so small.   I spent the day soldering them together.  (The height of a 50 pence coin).  In all, I've made 24 sets to go between the lifeboat davits, and today I plan to make the matching hand rails from coffee sticks, then spray them white.   ok2



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 08, 2017, 08:22:33 pm
What a delightful model Ken. She will look better than anything else on your pond when completed  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 08, 2017, 08:28:11 pm
What a delightful model Ken. She will look better than anything else on your pond when completed  :-))


Thanks for the kind words.  Still a way to go.  I've been fencing all day.   :}

ken


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 13, 2017, 10:48:45 am
Sorry for the delay in production as I have been struggling with the 'railings'.   What a nightmare  !!

I have scrapped the idea of making them and have gone for the model train kit of  'fences' in the very small scale.  They come out at half the size I self constructed earlier, which makes them smaller than small.  Pictures will follow.  The camera is closer and goes out of focus where the stuff is too small.   :}

I have also been working on securing the lifeboats and on the pulley systems.  The design will not actually work but look as if it might, if that makes sense.  !!

I actually painted one of the small decks with some light brown paint but it looks ghastly, so that idea is not a smart move.  I have to figure how to clean it off now.

All in all,  it's been a rotten week in the workshop.



 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 14, 2017, 12:20:52 am
They do look good Ken, and very neat.

Could you paint over the brown?What colour do you really want?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 15, 2017, 09:46:19 am

Well, that mess was sanded of and we have had a brain wave.   What to do with 2000 coffee sticks.

I have shaped them and cut them and dyed them light brown and now spending my days Planking. 

What do you think  ?

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 15, 2017, 09:48:22 am

The next batch are dry so it's the foredecks today.

The lifeboats may be secured later when I find a suitable way of securing them with wires.   %)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Netleyned on May 15, 2017, 10:42:25 am
The planking really enhances the deck detail Ken.
 :-)) :-)) :-))


Ned
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 15, 2017, 08:40:10 pm
Thank you Ned.

I've gone planking mad now and decided to do most of the decks.  Here's a preview of the work so far.   The coffee sticks have been 'shaped'  with the circular disk machine to precise angles and then stained with a light oak wood dye.  It looks a treat so I must watch out I don't over do it.  (I have enough sticks for several liners.  tehe)


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 15, 2017, 08:45:49 pm

In the last picture the cabin has been raised off from the wet dye, and looks weird at the moment.   %)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 16, 2017, 09:41:49 pm
A full day planking.  Really getting the hang of it now.   ok2

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 16, 2017, 09:43:29 pm
Final batch for now.

The funnels are not yet secured.  (you can probably tell that)

I would have liked to plank along the deck sides but this involves removing all the lifeboat davits,  unless I plank underneath them and leave the final plank at the deck edge off.   ooh er.    I'll sleep on it and decide.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on May 16, 2017, 09:50:19 pm
She is certainly looking fine there Ken - a credit to you and your patience!!!!
A damn good example of what can be achieved with imagination and perseverance.  Well done!
C
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 16, 2017, 09:52:24 pm

Thank you Carl.  praise indeed.

The colour is beginning to set her off nicely.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 16, 2017, 09:57:23 pm
I think a vessel conveying passengers in comfort and style should have wooden decks, Corticene is just so warshippish. Can you imagine playing deck quoits on Lino?

Leave the davits be and perhaps have the less luxurious areas done out in 'Lino'. Only the crew go there normally  :-)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 16, 2017, 09:59:40 pm

Cheers Ian.

I believe the first class passengers strolled along these side decks under the lifeboats so we'd better not give them Lino.   :}

Decision tomorrow

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 16, 2017, 10:05:36 pm
Too true. You can get lengths of stick under the davits and mark where you need to cut slots out to accomodate them (Not sure that makes sense, it is after ten O'clock  {:-{ )

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on May 16, 2017, 10:06:54 pm
How about using a wood veneer for the deck under the davits?
It is thin enough to easily cut into small sections to lay under and between the davits and can be marked with a fine black pen to indicate deck planking and then varnished. Veneer can be glued down with Evo-Stik type contact adhesive.
Please don't try to remove the davits now - that would only cause too much damage and that would be a real shame.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 16, 2017, 10:10:43 pm

That's what I was thinking.  I may be able to work under the structures.  (I have all the time in the world !)

The davits are only secured at the outside edge of the deck and the sides of the cabins.

There might be a prize for the Mayhemer who guesses the amount of coffee sticks I have used.   {-)    {-)    {-) 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 16, 2017, 10:23:46 pm
I think you have used 300 sticks by being careful and efficient.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 16, 2017, 10:30:46 pm
Well done Ian.   Give that man a prize.  I've got 1000 more in the bag.

I have laid the sticks out and stain/varnished them. These were then individually measured and cut square and the joins were offset randomly and then super glued into place on the plastic floors.  (sticks like  ****  to a blanket).  I'm still picking superglue off my fingers tonight whilst sitting here.    %)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 17, 2017, 09:16:35 pm

Now moving on to the side decking.  I have had to remove the davits for ease of access.

This has given me a clear run along the sides.  Hope to get started tomorrow, as I was called away on taxi and shopping duties.    %)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 18, 2017, 09:14:39 pm
I hope that none of them broke.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 19, 2017, 10:12:53 am

I'm getting the hang of  'getting them orf now,  Ian.  Hammer and chisel.  I know it sounds worst than it is.  I did get away with it.   %)


It took all day to  'line'  the sides with planking and must say it came out rather well.  Mind you,  in scale terms, they come out at 2 foot wide.    :}    but they look Ok from the distance.  (according to  'er indoors')

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 19, 2017, 07:41:09 pm
She does look a lot better with all round planks, and if Mrs Tug Kenny is happy then that must help make future modelling projects permissable  :D

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 20, 2017, 09:20:50 pm
I have now re-fitted the lifeboat davits and here are some of the latest pictures.

You will also notice that I have started fitting the railings.  These are from the model train section in my local shop.  They seem to be just the right size.  They are so small that I've misjudged how many I need and will have to go back for some more. There should be railings all the way along the boat deck, in front of the davits.    10 foot of em  !!!    %)



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: jarvo on May 21, 2017, 11:16:48 am
Crossover modeling, they are only model railway because the packet says so!!!!  great model and looking forward to the next addition


Mark
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: BFSMP on May 21, 2017, 12:00:54 pm

looking superb, and sublime. Amazing attention to detail, and a lovely model.


Jim.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Mark T on May 21, 2017, 03:32:58 pm
I love this build Ken its looking great and looking forward to the next post  :-)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 21, 2017, 05:05:17 pm
You will be the star portrait in the model shops 2018 calendar at this rate Ken! I am sure even the most diehard of railway modellers would baulk at buying ten feet of fence! That is serious layout modelling quanitites we are talking here:O)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 21, 2017, 08:41:33 pm

Thank you for the kind comments.   :-))

No pictures today as there's no difference at the moment.  The extra fences are on order so I'm working on the davit's rigging in readiness for the lifeboat to be attached.

ken
Title: Queen Mary - wartime dress
Post by: Antipodes on May 22, 2017, 12:42:47 am
Looking through some old photos with a mate yesterday and came across this. Not the best quality snap of the Queen Mary sometime during WW2.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4180/34423331740_d349d8c27c_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/UrSzeE)Queen Mary (https://flic.kr/p/UrSzeE)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on May 22, 2017, 03:02:35 am
Here is another image of TMH Queen Mary [1942 period]......anchored off Garden Island Naval Dockyard just down from the Sydney Harbour Bridge

The RED oval is a building at the very western end of the GID ferry wharf

She would have required both a bow and stern anchor to safely moor there O0

Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary - wartime dress
Post by: TailUK on May 22, 2017, 08:43:05 am
Looking through some old photos with a mate yesterday and came across this. Not the best quality snap of the Queen Mary sometime during WW2.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4180/34423331740_d349d8c27c_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/UrSzeE)Queen Mary (https://flic.kr/p/UrSzeE)

That's a great picture.  It must be quite early in her military career as she's not fitted with the de-gaussing coils.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: raflaunches on May 22, 2017, 09:07:07 am
I remember reading several years ago from a second hand book shop the Pen and Sword book 'Queen Mary and the Cruiser'. If you can find the book it explains the incident very well and how secret it was mainly for moral purposes but it covers the events that led to the collision of the Queen Mary into the HMS Curacoa or the other way round depending on the opinion given. But I seem to remember seeing some pictures in the centre of the book of both vessels during the war. When I get home I'll fetch the book out and upload the pictures.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on May 22, 2017, 09:16:30 am
I remember reading several years ago from a second hand book shop the Pen and Sword book 'Queen Mary and the Cruiser'. If you can find the book it explains the incident very well and how secret it was mainly for moral purposes but it covers the events that led to the collision of the Queen Mary into the HMS Curacoa or the other way round depending on the opinion given. But I seem to remember seeing some pictures in the centre of the book of both vessels during the war. When I get home I'll fetch the book out and upload the pictures.

Look out for "Warrior Queens" as well.  A very good account of the military service of both the Mary and the Elizabeth.  The photo above must be about 1940 when the QM became the largest ship ever to sail into Sidney harbour.  Interesting trivia; The forgings for the Queen Mary and much of the steel for the Sydney Harbour bridge came from the same foundry.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 23, 2017, 09:54:15 pm

The lifeboat davits are all strung up ready for the little boats.  These are waiting for the 10 foot of railings on order at the local model shop.  They have to be fitted first before the side decks get crowded.    %)

Whilst I'm waiting, I decided to fit the 4 drive motors and steering servo and get it all lined up.  It took all day to get the angles right. I have used a flexible pipe to cut down on vibrations.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on May 29, 2017, 08:06:18 pm
Fantastic job Kenny :-)) All in a few months, and we are in awe of your skills. It would be great to see her afloat this year, the 50th anniversary of her last voyage to Long Beach.
Bob.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 08:38:08 pm
I remember reading several years ago from a second hand book shop the Pen and Sword book 'Queen Mary and the Cruiser'. If you can find the book it explains the incident very well and how secret it was mainly for moral purposes but it covers the events that led to the collision of the Queen Mary into the HMS Curacoa or the other way round depending on the opinion given. But I seem to remember seeing some pictures in the centre of the book of both vessels during the war. When I get home I'll fetch the book out and upload the pictures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Curacoa_(D41)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8286/7723631194_3cd50e0503.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 08:41:16 pm
Thank you the kind comments,  I'm heading for that anniversary Nemo.    :-))

I have been working with the fiddly bits and mass production sections and am pleased to show all her lifeboats now on board.

I am concentrating on the Bow section at the moment as the railings are still on back order, so took a chance with the lifeboat assemblies.

As the weather has improved, I have taken her outside for her first float test in the pool.  I am pleased to report there are 'No' water leaks into the hull.  It was glassed on this precaution in readiness.  She floats fine without the top section fitted but  (same as the Titanic I built)  when the upper works are fitted she rolls over as expected.

I fitted an assortment of heavy lead batteries to the hull to test for  the 'tip over'  factor and determined she will need ballast in the keel totalling over 15 pounds and fitted as low as possible.  (phew).    Failing a successful balancing act then I will go with Colin's suggestion (for my Titanic) of a removable drop keel, like a yacht.

Here are some pictures of the progress.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 08:44:39 pm
Amazing  8)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 08:49:01 pm
Thanks for the information T33cno.   :-))

There is a film  on Youtube about the incident.  I do have the damage pictures in my records and she's quite a sturdy ship, the  'Ol mary'.  She held the water back until she got back home.  All credit to the internal watertight bulkheads.

Did anyone see the TV last week about her.  An hour of praise and details about the construction.  All very interesting stuff. I would advise seeing it on 'catch up TV',  as every time you look at, you can see something different in details.

Cheers

ken

ps        I have fitted nameplate on,  and started on the funnel rigging.    :}



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 08:51:39 pm
There was a documentary on TV a couple of months ago that was so interesting from her start stop build to present day.
Incredible history
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 08:57:16 pm

The more you read about her, the more you fall in love with her.  There's so much detail that people just do not know of or appreciate.

I plan to add the tiny details that  'clogs' the decks.  Anyone know what colour the tennis court was please ?

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 09:06:17 pm
Last aired April 3rd. Pity they won't sell a DVD


Try this resource Kenny


http://www.sterling.rmplc.co.uk/visions/decks.html
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 09:09:50 pm
(http://www.sterling.rmplc.co.uk/visions/tennequoits.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 09:19:01 pm


Cheers Andy,  you're a mine of information.  Fancy coming up with that picture so quickly. I appreciate colour photography wasn't around in those days but it really is a valuable resource.

I have the construction book already, as it would not be possible to build her otherwise. Thanks for the information as I am always grateful for more details than I ever imagined would be needed.  I have noticed the she is even on Facebook as well as the other well know sites.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 09:25:51 pm
Glad to be of help Ken


I would say from the description that it is just regular deck "Teak" it says


(http://www.sterling.rmplc.co.uk/visions/tennis3.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 09:38:33 pm

The picture above shows the  'courts'  on the stern of B deck.  You can see the wash from the propellers behind it.

The original first class court was between the first and second funnel on A deck and wasn't very large so it may have been just for Badmington.  (until the wind caught it  !  tehe).   It's shown  (in black and white) as marked out, so maybe your suggestion  is correct and it was original wood colour.  (not to worry as the people that would have played there are long gone).

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 29, 2017, 09:42:35 pm
Teak weathers to a silvery grey colour.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 09:47:45 pm

Hi Colin.

The change of deck colour would look good on the  'courts'  and make it stand out.   :-))

ken

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 09:50:22 pm
Britannia weathered
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-87kM2rm/0/ce19bd27/XL/IMG_0148-XL.jpg)


(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Miscellaneous/i-jNKmFcx/0/79fe03f3/X2/IMG_0132-X2.jpg)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 09:52:01 pm
She hasn't been out in the sun long enough to weather yet.     %)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 09:56:43 pm
She hasn't been out in the sun long enough to weather yet.     %)

ken


 {-)  She's beautiful let her grow old herself  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 09:58:12 pm
Recent pictures
http://zanzinger.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/RMS-Queen-Mary/G0000OV7YNcm7Drg/I0000UqSIWjz.oSw/C0000D27NoCzPbaM

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 10:04:55 pm

They are excellent quality.  Thank you for posting.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 10:08:17 pm
They are excellent quality.  Thank you for posting.

ken


I notice there is a great deal of difference between port and starboard decks due to Sun bleaching I guess or renewal for tourists . So there is a great scope of deck shades that are compatible
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 29, 2017, 10:10:50 pm
Looks like they have patched up the lifeboats then. Several had the bottoms falling out of them when we visited in 2001.

Nice to see the cocktail lounge overlooking the bow - we enjoyed a drink there.

Maybe some of the planking has been renewed. The ship undergoes continuous maintenance although you do wonder how long she will eventually last. Not as long as a wooden preserved ship I would guess.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: T33cno on May 29, 2017, 10:11:46 pm
Another nice tribute web site
http://www.ssmaritime.com/queenmary.htm
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on May 29, 2017, 10:14:45 pm
A mooring Telegraph? %).....suppose no two-ways then... & certainly an improvement on flag signals  O0.....Derek
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 29, 2017, 10:17:40 pm
No walkie talkies in those days but I believe there would have been phone connections from the bridge to the bow and stern. However a telegraph repeater leaves no room for doubt.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 29, 2017, 10:21:07 pm

Amazing details.  Thank you for the input fellas.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: jarvo on May 30, 2017, 08:55:50 am
Good morning to you all, I have looked at the photos and some of the riveting shows what look like patches on the hull, but they seem to be placed in a formal pattern along the hull, in a specific diagonal pattern, were they strengthening panels or for a specific purpose?


Regards


Mark
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 30, 2017, 10:10:21 am

I would love to help you mark, but unfortunately, my knowledge doesn't extend this far.

All I know its that the ship has so many rivets that visitors even remark in surprise when seeing them.  I have tried in various places to replicate them on my model, but succeeded in ruining the effect.

Here's a  snapshot of the port side.

Cheers

ken
 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: jarvo on May 30, 2017, 10:14:15 am
Hi Ken, thats the pattern i was talking about, like a wave down the hull. Wonder why????


Mark
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 30, 2017, 10:17:24 am

It's probably structural design to stop flexing between bow and stern.

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Colin Bishop on May 30, 2017, 03:24:37 pm
Just as likely to be remedial strengthening work where cracks were appearing after years of hard service. Common on warships too.

Colin
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on May 30, 2017, 03:57:58 pm
Looks like they have patched up the lifeboats then. Several had the bottoms falling out of them when we visited in 2001.Nice to see the cocktail lounge overlooking the bow - we enjoyed a drink there.
Maybe some of the planking has been renewed. The ship undergoes continuous maintenance although you do wonder how long she will eventually last. Not as long as a wooden preserved ship I would guess.Colin

Some recent disturbing surveys and megabuck problems here - let's hope they get her back to her old self.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_MUVqjcfjA&t=57s
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 30, 2017, 08:11:39 pm
Just as likely to be remedial strengthening work where cracks were appearing after years of hard service. Common on warships too.

Colin

Royal Sovereign was found to be in a fragile state during a major inspection in dry dock, with hull plates very thin in places that needed replacing.

What did your shop say about the vast quantities of fencing you ordered Ken? She's getting better and better all the time  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 30, 2017, 08:27:16 pm
I am now in possession of the fences with enough to go all around the lifeboat deck.     8)  I'm still not sure there's enough, but we'll see.

Today I fitted the funnel securing wires using a very strong black thread.   They are all pulled tight and glued into position. I do plan to paint the heads showing from the rivets, as they do show up against the funnels.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 30, 2017, 08:50:08 pm
Crikey, that is a forest of stays Ken. They add a finesse to the model.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 30, 2017, 08:55:56 pm

Thanks Ian.  I'm still picking superglue off my fingers.      {-)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: roycv on May 31, 2017, 03:09:53 pm
Hello Ken, I am amazed how far you have come in 5 months!  Great looking model
regards Roy
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 31, 2017, 08:57:44 pm
Thanks Roy.

Today I glued in Six and a half feet of half an inch high railings.  I had to sandpaper down my fingers before tea.   {-)  The model is becoming fragile to handle now, so I have to be careful.

The captain is aboard.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on May 31, 2017, 09:03:01 pm

I have started on the forward crane.  This is attached to the main mast and it has 7 arms which swing out , driven by separate motors. These will be for display only and non working.

The main mast has been tapered in readiness for the crows nest and rigging.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on May 31, 2017, 10:30:28 pm
Have you a close up of the pivots on those cranes Ken? They look scratch built but am interested for future reference:O)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 01, 2017, 10:34:33 am

At the moment they are just bent tubing, but do swing left and right. They will have to be flexible because the bow section is lower down, so they will have to rest at an angle.
 I am thinking about the raising and lowering mechanism and will show it when I get it right.   ok2

cheers

ken

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 02, 2017, 08:45:34 pm
Have you a close up of the pivots on those cranes Ken? They look scratch built but am interested for future reference:O)


Hi Ian,

Just for you,  here is my method.

The arm of the crane was sanded down to fit a brass tube tightly.  The end of the tube was squeezed flat and a hole drilled into it for the pivot mechanism.

I then cut some brass strips down to size and soldered them together in a block,  leaving the top section to clamp over the flattened end of the arm.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 02, 2017, 08:47:38 pm

This messy solder job was then sanded down  (by machine) to form a round end for insertion into the flange surrounding the main mast.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 02, 2017, 08:49:28 pm

These 'ends' were then fitted to the mast attachment and pivot about 90 degrees, both left and right and up and down.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 02, 2017, 08:51:52 pm
just for a laugh, I enclose a picture where my hand is about to 'cuff' the captain around the ear.

This should give an idea of the what 1 in 200 scale is like to work on.   {-)   O0 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Dreadnought on June 02, 2017, 08:55:05 pm
Wow really great detail  :-)) :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 02, 2017, 08:56:43 pm

Thank you.   Getting the superglue off gives me something to do of an evening.  :}

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on June 02, 2017, 09:00:24 pm
Ta Ken, they look really good close up. That is another tip for the archives.

Does Mrs Kenny tell you to stop picking, or do you do it away from the telly?
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 02, 2017, 09:04:18 pm

Cheers matey.   :-))      Glad to help.  Tip........ remove the wood before applying heat to the brass.  (ask me how I know)

I believe there's some sort of talent show running at the moment.  That's why I'm in the other room.    :}

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Dreadnought on June 03, 2017, 10:16:43 pm
Thank you.   Getting the superglue off gives me something to do of an evening.  :}

ken


LOL I find getting the superglue off my fingers keeps me entertained all evening! %%
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 05, 2017, 09:39:43 am

I have made some small hand rails for the stairs as the shop ones are over a pound each !!!

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 05, 2017, 09:41:14 am

Then it was on to the bollards.

Here's my attempt at these tiny mooring ones.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 05, 2017, 09:45:56 am

....  and now onto the 'Fun part'.   The rigging.       %)

Believe it or not,  this has taken a lot of time,  what with the measuring and  'banging in'  of nails and threading cotton  (several times) and it still doesn't look right.  I have 4 sets to make.

Any suggestions please.   %)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Nemo on June 05, 2017, 10:46:52 am
LOL I find getting the superglue off my fingers keeps me entertained all evening! %%

Ken: My superglue remover is one of these pan scourers, with a dash of  washing-up liquid and warm water. Its all gone in a minute!  :-))
Bob.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: dreadnought72 on June 05, 2017, 11:19:44 am
...Any suggestions please.   %)


Stretched plastic sprue, masking tape and tiny blobs of liquid polystyrene glue?


Andy
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on June 05, 2017, 12:05:29 pm
....  and now onto the 'Fun part'.   The rigging.       %)

Believe it or not,  this has taken a lot of time,  what with the measuring and  'banging in'  of nails and threading cotton  (several times) and it still doesn't look right.  I have 4 sets to make.

Any suggestions please.   %)

Airfix used to include a jig for making ratlines in their sailing ship kits  perhaps you know someone who might have one or try making one.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: barriew on June 05, 2017, 02:39:40 pm
Ken


What size are they? Length and width. I have some from a plastic kit which are quite fine. Also how many vertical lines?


Barrie
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: barriew on June 05, 2017, 02:42:57 pm
Photo of a sample - there are other formats.


Barrie
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 05, 2017, 08:09:41 pm

Thanks guys.   :-))

I've been experimenting.  It's quite a tricky job to get it looking right but we're getting there.  Nothing to show yet but I'm encouraged.

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: derekwarner on June 05, 2017, 10:44:02 pm
Ken.......perhaps Mrs Churchill knows the steps....you know......knit one, pearl one   %) ......

Good luck.....I can see it now...'Tug Kenny's Knitting Classes'........Derek  {-)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 06, 2017, 06:49:19 pm
The knitting class has started. 

All at the back sit down please.   {-)   {-)

Here is my attempt at knitting the rungs together.  First, I drew out the shape and nailed pins at the ends of the lines. The thread was run out following the guide lines and secured with a dab of superglue.  it was decided not to wrap the thread around but to just lay it flat.

When dry it will be cut loose and trimmed to shape.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 06, 2017, 06:55:29 pm
While it's drying, I got on with the really small items.  I have made some bollards and tiny bits/n/pieces.  The bollards were made in a home made jig using an electric drill clamped in the vice.  (I do like to live on the edge, as you know)

Here they are being glued in situ.  The anchor chains are secured.  ( I wonder if the wife will miss that necklace )

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: BFSMP on June 06, 2017, 07:00:00 pm

great tip on making ratlines.
Far easier than in the old Bassette Lowke book I had once, that showed sawing nicks into wood at even spaces and then nailing pins into the ends of the blocks.
A tedious affair, lol {:-{


Jim.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 06, 2017, 07:07:01 pm

Glad you like it.  :-))  I've compared it with the drawings and the rat lines only go half way across.  It's no bother to cut the waste bits from one side. Seems weird but that's the way it's shown.

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 08, 2017, 09:24:42 pm

I have made the 4 riggings for the two masts and show them here, temporarily taped to the masts.

Work has started on the crows nest. It's really no bigger than a 50 pence coin.   %)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 09, 2017, 08:22:07 pm

I have made a winch for the stern and added a few bollards.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 09, 2017, 08:27:14 pm
The masts have been glued in and wires run from the  tops.  The mast rigging has been located to the deck and needs securing to the tops of the mast.  I have also fitted in the missing bollards and some tiny pieces and improved the crane arm support rig. 

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on June 10, 2017, 05:38:14 pm
I do like the effort you have made with the shrouds and ratlines. The odd half way across ratlines is a nice detail. Just out of interest, I watched a documantry while at my Auntie's on Wednesday evening about the Clyde ship builders, and it showed the Queen Mary and she had light coloured boat covers.

Nearly there Ken!
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 12, 2017, 10:03:35 am

                  OH MY GAWD      :o

I have made a measurement mistake way back and it's come to haunt me.

The length of the mast deck is not long enough to site the winch motors around the Foremast.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 12, 2017, 10:07:54 am
I have spent every working hour this weekend, re-measuring and cutting and sanding to enlarge the area.

This involves removing the sealed deck above and sliding it backwards to get the room required.   It all came out Ok in the end.  I have to re-plank the deck and make another 'multi-window' surround for the deck above.

Now feeling  'Spurred on' by the feeling it's looking right at last.


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 12, 2017, 10:09:06 am
Here is the top section which has been cut back and being re-built.

Just a  'bit'  of planking to do.  hey Ho..........   that's what model boat building is all about




Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Bob K on June 12, 2017, 10:16:56 am
She is looking really magnificent Kenny. 
It takes a lot of courage to remake such a large section at this late stage of the build.   :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 12, 2017, 10:20:01 am

Cheers Bob.

I don't mind the work as I so much want her to be correct.   

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: TailUK on June 12, 2017, 11:17:15 am
If you don't mind me saying so I think you might have been better pushing the front of the winch deck forward than taking the sun deck back. You didn't need to gain that much for the winch. or perhaps a little bit off one and add a bit to the other.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 12, 2017, 08:19:06 pm
    We got there in the end.  Here she is with a longer deck.   Plenty of room for the seven cranes  !!!      I had to rip out the old decking, which brought the mast rigging into play, before re- planking the whole section again.   %)

Thanks for the picture. It's the one I'm working too as well, along with the plans. we got there in the end.

Cheers

ken

 
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on June 12, 2017, 08:58:21 pm
Now doesn't that look lovely. Even though I would not have known any different, I did think the old layout looked odd, if only just being cramped.

It's just the ticket now, and I love the way the cranes are laid out, very attractive.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: carlmt on June 12, 2017, 10:09:52 pm
I take my hat off to you Ken!!!
 
That takes courage to strip back such a major amount of work to get it 'right', but you seem to have retained the enthusiasm to do it.  Me?  I know I would have got into a terrible fit..........
 
She is certainly looking the business friend - really looking forward to seeing her in her element!
 
Very well done - very well done indeed!!!!
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 12, 2017, 10:41:59 pm

Thank you both for your lovely comments.  I do like to show how it really is and the trials and tribulations of our hobby.

I must admit I'm enjoying this build and look forward to the water test.   :}

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: chipchase on June 12, 2017, 11:45:55 pm
looking good Ken, i understands how you feel about getting it right, it looked ok the way it was but when you realise you have made a mistake you have to put it right. I have lost count how many times that i have spent a whole day working on a part of a model then after a good nights sleep looking at it in the morning then just throwing it into the scrap build. enjoying your build  :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 14, 2017, 03:22:05 pm

Loading winches now fitted.

She's almost finished, so it's out in the garden for a movie shoot.



Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 14, 2017, 03:25:17 pm

Queen Mary open to the public.    :-))

Here are a series of views in our Walk about the great Liner.

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 14, 2017, 03:26:20 pm

More views


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 14, 2017, 03:27:38 pm

Continued..


Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 14, 2017, 03:28:41 pm
Queen Mary meets Titanic.  (it never happened in real life)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: dougal99 on June 14, 2017, 04:30:08 pm
Nice shots of the garden  {-)






Your boats are seriously impressive and built so fast (well compared to me). Congratulations on a job well done.  :-)) :-)) :-)) :-)) :-)) :-))
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: jarvo on June 14, 2017, 04:32:57 pm
Fantastic!!!  When is the grand launch??
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: John W E on June 14, 2017, 06:18:46 pm
Absolutely brilliant Ken :-) lovely models, something to be proud of those are  :-)) :-))

John
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on June 14, 2017, 09:34:49 pm
It has been a joy to watch this build from Ply to paint, seeing all the effort gone into research and experiment with layout etc.

She will look amazing on the water Ken. Especially if you can sail her and Titanic at the same time.

I'll get a fresh pack of hobnobs for your next build:O)
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Daleb on June 14, 2017, 09:40:34 pm
I can't believe how quickly you have built the Queen Mary Ken, hat off to you. I too have been following this from the beginning and so looking forward to seeing pics on the water  :-))


Dale.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: BFSMP on June 14, 2017, 10:14:30 pm

it has been a wonderful build which I have enjoyed every post on it. and to see both the QM and the Titanic together is absolutely wonderful.


they are magnificent models of which I hope will bring you great joy when sailing.


enjoy the summer down at the pond......but sail at your peril in the winter....you know what happens to mighty ships when there is a cold snap, and ice on the water.
Jim.
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 15, 2017, 09:44:12 am

Thank you all for your kind comments.   I've had a lie down and now  'She'  wonders what I should make next.    :}

I tried explaining about getting them ready for sailing and  'scrap lead' in the hulls, but I feel she didn't really understand.  9 days to go, for our Golden Wedding.   :-))

Cheers

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: ballastanksian on June 15, 2017, 07:59:51 pm
Congratulations for the big day Mr and Mrs:O)

Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tug-Kenny RIP on June 15, 2017, 09:48:06 pm

Thank you Ian.  50 years .....It sort of creeps up on you.    ;)

ken
Title: Re: Queen Mary
Post by: Tafelspitz on June 16, 2017, 05:59:44 am
Truly magnificent work there, Ken! Hats off to you. She's a real beauty and something you can, should and surely will be proud of  :-))