Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR  (Read 18175 times)

poll

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 946
  • Location: Pontefract, West Yorkshire.
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #25 on: January 19, 2007, 11:28:49 pm »

     Hi  Bluebird.
     
     This is the same B/thruster I fitted to my typhoon tug,
     The Idea & designer was  ministeave of the E/port club
     It has plenty of thrust it will push a 250LB tanker sideways.
     See photo of bow thruster.

     Regards

     John.
Logged

BlazingPenguin

  • Guest
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #26 on: January 20, 2007, 10:25:02 am »

Have to back up 'Poll' and MiniSteve on their bow thruster, bags of power and relatively easy to make. I can see no reason why the same principles couldnt be scaled down now to fit a particular boat. I liked the idea because I had room at the front of the 'Afon Alaw' hull to get that in, but a more traditional shape....less flat?.....has less room for the monster version, have to check out Poll's Typhoon at some point for that.

On that thruster Poll.....did you try kort props in one, or just got for the high volume racing prop straight off?
I ask because I have a project in mind that will require a severly heavy duty thruster....something around 60mm say...and Im planning on doing on like yours but with a kort?
I made a jig for doing props, so theres no real outlay for commercial ones, build my own to suit experiment etc? Any info appreciated!
Logged

poll

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 946
  • Location: Pontefract, West Yorkshire.
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2007, 09:07:39 pm »

  Hi Billy.
  We put the plastic 45x in because some times you have to shape the prop
  a wee bit [ do you like that a WEE bit ] I'll be sailing with you yet.
  I had to do this on the typhoon, the shaft is on a steep angle so I had to shape
  the prop to make it fit snug in the tube plus we don't fit a grill on the end of the tube
  if you was to get a peace of thick stick up the tube it would break the prop. Not smash the shaft and
  tube,    Will get a photo for you.

  Regards

  John.
 
Logged

BlazingPenguin

  • Guest
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2007, 04:35:27 pm »

The couple I've made now John have been 6mm shaft and with the usable part of the part being almost all 'root' Im thinking that its almost unbreakable, a hefty stall and resultant fried motor and ESC perhaps, but the shaft etc could be ok...maybe?

Scale mesh on the inlets would restrict flow in an instant with a feather or piece of paper drawn onto it....almost a certainty in most ponds. Perhaps on or two bars or a cross or whatever to keep put heavier items, paper then being able to be either flowed through, or hooked out if required?

The props Ive made so far have been 'flat' with no change of agle from root to tip of the blade, the idea being there will be little loss of power in reverse, other than the minimal amount given by most motors against their preferred direction.
I stuck one on a section of shaft, held it in a bucket in the workshop......do you have any idea how far a gallon of cold water can spread across a shed floor??? Result = plenty of thrust in either direction with either 3 or 4 bladed kort props and thats without the benefit of the nozzle too.

Either way you guys have supplied a great idea for a 'BT' other than the various commercial variety!

Bill
Logged

poll

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 946
  • Location: Pontefract, West Yorkshire.
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2007, 09:39:40 pm »

     Hi Billy.
     Some more pici's not too good but may help, It's a small area in the bow of the typhoon.

     Good luck

     John.

    Ps         Some more photo's on the way from Steve.
Logged

ministeve

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 620
  • washing the decks!!!
  • Location: birkenhead wirral
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #30 on: January 22, 2007, 10:18:47 pm »

hi billy even more pics and some sort of scale to let u know wot sort of size these thrusters are the hull is a portgarth from mmm
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #31 on: January 22, 2007, 10:30:29 pm »

hi all, the information on the bow thrusters has given me lots of food for thought, although I am busy, at the moment, installing the propellors and rudders on the Seaforth.   I am keenly watching the information coming in and am building up several ideas about the building of the bow thruster.  At the moment all that has been shown has been twice the size I need.  The thought now is how to reduce and keep the efficiency of the bow thruster.   I have very limited space in the bow.   Please keep the information and pics coming in.

Aye
John E
BLUEBIRD
Logged

ministeve

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 620
  • washing the decks!!!
  • Location: birkenhead wirral
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #32 on: January 22, 2007, 10:56:28 pm »

hi bluebird you can get 20mm overflow pipe i am trying to make a small version but other things have needed my attention will put some pics on when i do make one
Logged

BlazingPenguin

  • Guest
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #33 on: January 23, 2007, 01:30:00 am »

By using a straight coupling Ive managed to shave off a few mm giving a shallower angle Steve/John, but seeing how extreme an angle Johns managed for the Typhoon leads me to think these will fit more than I imagined at first.
The straight coupling is also a lot quiter than the std flex coupling too.
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #34 on: January 25, 2007, 09:47:02 pm »

Hi all, spent most of today and yesterday come to that, trying to design and build a bow thruster similar to those on this Forum thread and the problem I had is the space in the bow.   The angle of the prop in the tube is too steep and rather than causing adequate thrust, it tends to agitate the water in the tube.

so.......after soaking the bathroom and gettng wrong off the Mrs - she took pity on me and held me batteries  ;D  an acted as a switch - we decided to order a Graupener and hope this is delivered tomorrow.   

Thanks to Riggers for talking me through resizing pics - hope these pics work.

Aye
John E
BLUEBIRD
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2007, 03:03:56 pm »

Going back to the portable gogeye, Blazing Penguin is right if only a conventional straight tug is considered but the Conqueror wasn't. The reason why you may have a portable gogeye shown in plan but not in elevation is simply because it was portable and thus wasn't always there!  ;D  The 'Conk' as she was known, was an anchor-handling-tug-supply-vessel (AHTS) which sometimes was used for towing/anchor-handling. When used as a supply vessel, the presence of a large forged-steel gogeye (think of an oval fairlead about 3' high) used only when towing etc. and planted in the centre of the deck, would seriously interfere with cargo stowing operations. Thus the gogeye was made to be unbolted (portable) such that it could be moved away from the cargo deck and stowed out of the way. When in use, the tow wire was run through the gogeye. Maersk vessels often used a similar system.

Cement (Barytes) tanks were sealed silos used for the carriage of powder cargos and discharged by compressed air. Liquid mud (cement) if carried, was discharged by scroll pumps. In powder form the barytes was mixed originally with diesel (later on with water when environmental concerns were addressed). The mud was used in drilling operations partly to lubricate/cool the drill bit and partly to fill the well behind/above the drill bit and counterbalance the pressure of any oil entering the well. Calculating the density of the mud was a bit of a black art and performed by so-called 'mud engineers'; we real engineers often took offence at the term and put them in the same category as Drillers and similar riff-raff. ;D

Several of the early Seaforth vessels did have A-frames at the stern but they were all later removed as being of no real benefit.

Hope this clarifies things.
Regards

BarryM
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2007, 09:11:09 pm »

Hi there Barry M

thank you very much for this information - obviously you must have sailed on these ships/sailed for Seaforth - the most difficult part about building anything like this is obtaining photographs - you dont have any do you?

Thank you again for the information

Aye
John E
BLUEBIRD
Logged

Red Dragon

  • Guest
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2007, 11:04:33 pm »

where is she now?
is she still in one piece?
what she doing?
or, is she a new BMW CAR
OR a SKODA

Not a lot of info on the web about her, she went for scrap in Mexico i think in the late 90's
there is a scale model of her in the Merseyside Maritime Museum, if i can find the pictures i will post them.
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2007, 11:18:16 pm »

Red Dragon thank you very much - it would be much appreciated if you could post the pics

aye
john e
bluebird
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #39 on: February 06, 2007, 09:28:47 am »

Hi there Barry M

thank you very much for this information - obviously you must have sailed on these ships/sailed for Seaforth - the most difficult part about building anything like this is obtaining photographs - you dont have any do you?

Thank you again for the information

Aye
John E
BLUEBIRD

John,

I never sailed on Seaforth vessels but spent half my career in the N Sea oil game. Now retired from it all I do not have any photos of Seaforth vessels but may be able to get something via friends who are still toiling away. If I do, I'll send them on.

Cheers,
Barry M
Logged

dreadnought72

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,898
  • Wood butcher with ten thumbs
  • Location: Airdrie, Scotland
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #40 on: February 06, 2007, 10:41:56 am »

Just a thought from a non-tug builder...

Does a bow thruster tube have to be transverse? If you've no space in the bows, what would be wrong with making a U shaped tube (as seen from above, with all the curves smooth, the tops of the U turning out to the sides of the hull). Then you could mount the thruster axially inside one of the straight sections, running fore-and-aft along the hull.

Sure, there'd be a few friction losses, and the addition of joints might slightly increase the risks of leaks, but you could counter all that with a bigger motor and copious filler over the pipework.

The water doesn't care if it's sent around corners...at least it doesn't when it comes out of the taps in my house!

Andy
Logged
Enjoying every minute sailing W9465 Mertensia

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #41 on: February 06, 2007, 06:25:29 pm »

The Seaforth Conqueror was later the Boa Conqueror and then Toisa Conqueror. Searching on Boa Conqueror drew a blank but Toisa Conqueror throws up a few leads.

Of use?

Barry M

PS. You can bend the internal trunk for a bow (or stern) thruster into a corkscrew if you want as long as the water is ejected sideways out the hull. Internal losses in our scales would be negligible.
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2007, 04:31:49 pm »

John,

I've drawn a blank withe last operators of the Seaforth Conqueror and an oil-industry shipbroker, both of whom would normally be expected to have specs and other info. The problem is that she has been out of the game for so long that most info has been put in File 13 (the bin). I have one more iron in the fire but I'm not optimistic even with promises of beer for info. Will let you know if anything turns up.

The only other route I can think of is an apporach to the builders who would certainly maintain G.A's etc on file. A letter accompanied by photo's of the buld may persuade them to provide info.
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #43 on: February 09, 2007, 08:32:05 pm »

Hi

Cheers for your efforts for trying to locate pictures for me.  Much appreciated - this is the build so far

80% of the electrics are in - just the winch and the pump for the fire monitors.  Debating whether the winch will be a working one or not, also debating whether to have working navigation lights or not.

Aye
John E
BLUEBIRD
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #44 on: February 10, 2007, 06:51:40 pm »

hi all , well the fire monitor pumps working well - washed the bathroom down a treat

aye
John E
BLUEBRD

PS the face says it all, when the Mrs walked in Camera in hand!
Logged

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #45 on: February 28, 2007, 05:17:04 pm »

Bluebird,

Having tried the last owners, a shipbroker and a former charterer for construction details, all I could come up with was the offer of a loan of the Stability Booklet. This would not be of use to you and so I'm declaring defeat on this one.

Barry M
Logged

John W E

  • I see no ships !!
  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,551
  • Location: South shields
Re: SEAFORTH CONQUEROR
« Reply #46 on: February 28, 2007, 05:55:06 pm »

hi ya there Barry M - thank you very much for all your efforts on this - this is really good of you.   Obviously the Stability Booklet would have been of little use but it is very good of you to have done all of this digging and research for me.   

There is another thread on this forum of the Seaforth Conqueror  but Martin is moving things about so he may have chucked  the thread and model in the bin  ;D

aye
john e
bluebird
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up