Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[Mad Scientist]

Geoff's models are in Gallery 29, and well worth a look!

Tom

[Geoff]

Short update. I still can't get the PC to work or the laptop to send e-mail so still can't get any pictures up. I painted the hull dark grey (Humbrol) but it came out too dark despite it being the colour recomended on the earlier linkre WW 1 colour. I think it was the scale effect where the original colour looks too vivid so I have repainted using a mixture (Humbrol 64 light grey and the dark grey - can't remember the number but will update) and it seems better. Just waiting for it all to dry before I put on the black waterline stripe.
 
Just awaiting props etc.
 
On a different note I just took delivery from Amazon of German Battlecrusiers of WW1. A very interesting book with lots of technical detail and action damage pictures I had not seen before.
 
Lots of details in the book plus various plans but the plans seem to be originals so relativley cluttered and not really suitable to build a model but overall an excellent book. If this is your thing buy it now whilst you can!
 
Cheers
 
Geoff

[raflaunches]

On a different note I just took delivery from Amazon of German Battlecrusiers of WW1. A very interesting book with lots of technical detail and action damage pictures I had not seen before.
 
Lots of details in the book plus various plans but the plans seem to be originals so relativley cluttered and not really suitable to build a model but overall an excellent book. If this is your thing buy it now whilst you can!

I too had this book on pre order from amazon since it was announced last year and I add to Geoff's recommendation- a stunning book of every German WW1 battlecruiser built including the Hindenburg. I just hope that the same author does the same for British WW1 battlecruisers too especially the 3D rendering in the centre pages. What I couldn't believe was the huge amount of damage received from the Battle of Jutland of the surviving German battlecruisers.


Looking forward to seeing your pictures when you've got access to them again Geoff.

[Geoff]

As a matter of interest the British battlecrusiers also took quite a pounding and a good number survived heavy damage. Their reputation has been scared by the three blowing up which was really caused by poor amunition handling and excessivly volatile cordite charges.
 
What is missing is a balanced perspective as the ships covers which would have showed how well the surviving battlecrusiers withstood comparable damage along with all the photographs were thrown out and destroyed in an act of administrative vandalism decades ago so there are few comparitive pictures.
 
Damage pictures I have seen on capital ships are:
 
Lion and Q turret also inside damage to Lion at Dogger bank and external picture of forecastle after DB.
Tiger hole in 6" side armour and Q turret
Collosus damage to superstraucture
Warspite damage to stern
Side view of Lion on way home from Jutland - this is interesting as the draft of the ship appears unchanged
 
There must have been a pictorial survey of the damaged ships Lion, Princess Royal, Tiger, Warspite, Barham, Valiant, Marlborough (torpedo) but they all seem to have disapeared. Maybe we could arrange for an internet search to see if any pictures can be found out there?
 
Geoff
 
 
 

[Geoff]

The hull paint colour is a 50/50 mix of Humbrol 27 and 64. It remains to be seen if I can get a perfect match with the suoerstructure as it took two full tins to paint the hull!
 
G

[ballastanksian]

As long as the shades are not drastically different I would not worry too much as wear, repainting and age of paint job will differ all over the ship. I appreciate you are not building her as if mothballed in Pompey harbour for a decade.

Perhaps a mist of the mix you have made spryed across the whole superstructure and hull will blend the two together?

[Geoff]

As an update the hull is now fully painted and 10 of the 6" secondary battery guns are installed. I found some plastic pipe fittings which were exactly the correct diameter for the main armamant barbetts and these have been made and painted with an extra layer of plastic card on the side sections as the armour was thicker there. This is evident in some phographs but you have to look for it to see it!
 
Possibly more importantly is that I now have a working computer which I just need to plug in and hopefully get going so, with luck, I may be able to post some more pictures.
 
I have been working on the main engines (two Talbot Horizon blower motors) and lining up the various shaft linkages. A problem I have is trying to find toothed belts/wheels of the correct diameter so I may have to use pulleys instead, or maybe gears, but we will see.
 
I have tried some experiments with decking (single sheets) to simulate planking but so far not sucessfull. You can't see the grain but the colour is all wrong!
 
Hope to get some pictures up soon.
 
Geoff

[tonyH]

Hi Geoff,

I don't know what size of drive belts you want but I've used HPC in the past www.hpcgearsinternational.com in the past. They're vary good quality and not overpriced. Might be worth a look?

Great build.

Tony

[Geoff]

I still can't figure out how to get some new pictures up as whilst my PC recognises the camera and I can get thumb size pictures (full size if I click on them) there doesn't appear to be an option to save them anywhere!
 
However as a verbal update I have mounted the main engines (Two Talbot Horizon interior blower motors) onto a plywood platform and have machined some alloy pulleys (3.5cm diameter) to fit on the motor output shaft and separate lay shaft to drive two propellors each.
 
I have used large diameter rubber "O" rings as the drive belts. One fitted almost perfectly and the other was way too large so I cut a chunk out and used superglue to join the "O" ring. Super glue just loves rubber and forms an incredibly strong joint albeit time will tell how long it lasts but at the moment I can't pull the "O" ring apart so it should be okay.
 
I used proper ball bearings in the lay shafts to minuimise friction and the now loaded motor draws 0.2 amps extra when the belts are on which is acceptable.
 
Still awaiting delivery of the prop shafts and will look to purchase some Huco style double couplings at the ME later this month.
 
Hope to start on the supertructure bases and conning tower this weekend.
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[Tug-Kenny RIP]

I still can't figure out how to get some new pictures up as whilst my PC recognises the camera and I can get thumb size pictures (full size if I click on them) there doesn't appear to be an option to save them anywhere!

If you are using Windows 7,  open up 'Libraries' and click on 'main drive c'.
When  on C,  click on 'New folder'  (at top of page)
Rename your folder  'Boat Pictures'  or anything you like.
Click on camera pictures and drag a picture over to this new folder on  c  drive.
When a moved picture is clicked on,  it should open up on your computer.
Check their size in Kbytes and if larger than 200k, try reducing them in size.

Seems a lot to take in but after 30 years you get used to manipulating  'things about a bit'

hope this helps

ken

[Geoff]

Thank you but I'm on "Linus" but I'll see if your suggestion works anyway
 
Thanks
 
Geoff

[ballastanksian]

How is the great uploading adventure going Geoff? I hope there isn't a laptop shaped dent in the wall

[derekwarner]

Geoff...without seeming pessimistic, any form of Superglue will remain brittle and ultimately separate from the nitrile/rubber o-ring material without any warning and leave your vessel stranded 

Take on o-ring off and measure the ID and nominate the cross section of the cord & confirm this...we will nominate a BS standard size in the line of best fit...

O-rings are relatively inexpensive and available from any Bearing or hydraulic shop.......in a one piece format cheap insurance  .... Derek

[Geoff]

Hmmm, my reply seems to have dissapeared. Thank you for the input and I'll do some measurements and report back. On a practical basis only the outer shafts are driven by "O" rings with the inner being direct drive to the main engines so in the event of an "O" ring breakage I'll only loose the outer prop (s) so hopefully won't be disabled.
 
I have now been constructing the brass tripod mast and superstructure (Obechi and plastic card and plywood) and will try to get some pictures up soon but I'm still having trouble with the computer - grrrrr!
 
I'm going to start a new topic on searchlights.
 
Cheers
 
Geoff

[Bob K]

If I may make a suggestion, with a ship of this size 'O' rings may at best slip, or at worst break.  A toothed belt however will provide  adequate powered propulsion in a more reliable manner. You will also need toothed 'cogs' with flanges as well. 

[Geoff]

I agree and that was my first thought but I could not find a source of toothed wheels and belts of the correct size at a price I thought reasonable! It was working out at around £80-£100 so I figured "O" rings may be a more viable solution.
 
I have seen people use "O" rings before and not had any adverse reports about early breakage. The pully wheels are about 3 cm in diameter so have a good surface area and centrifugal fource will push the "O" rings out increasing the tension a little and if I jam a prop on something it may be best if it does slip!
 
Despite the size of the model there is potentially a lot of mechanism to go inside including a smoke generator for both funnels and a multiplue shot gun firing mechanism (Blanks of course) which might take up a lot of internal space depending on how the experiments/development goes!
 
Its this latter that is causing construction problems as until I have figured out the mechanism I can't work out how much space I have to play with.
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
 

[Bob K]

OK, it was just an idea.  Conrad Electronics, Modelcraft. even Amazon.  Belts are around a fiver with toothed pulleys around £8. Being toothed you should get away with much smaller diameter, if space becomes an issue.
I used them for driving twin bow rudders in a very restricted corner.

[Colin Bishop]

I have used O rings successfully without problems but they don't like being stretched too much otherwise they bind and cause a lot of resistance. Get the right size and they will be OK but with your setup it sounds as if it would be quite difficult if not impossible to make small adjustments to the tension.

Colin

[Geoff]

Despite the size of the model the "pulley" room is quite small and I have no third pulley wheel to make adjustments at the present time so the "O" rings need to be the exact size needed. Due to the size of the engines and pulleys there isn't room to fit an idler wheel to use as an adjustment between the engine and second pulley albeit I could possibly fit a very small one between the huco couplings facing forwards.
 
I took the view to make the pulley's as large as possible to give the maximum area for the "O" ring to pull on and keep loadings down. The bigger the diameter the better the mechanical advantage but this is all dictated by the distance between the propellor shafts which in turn are dictated by the original plans!
 
Only time will tell if it works long term.  As above the worst that can happen is I loose two props and I think that unlikley at exactly the same time. If is doesn't work I'll have to work it out again!
 
Best
 
Geoff

[Pondweed]

Geoff
Meccano (although expensive) is a very good option for the model engineer.

I once fixed up a central shaft running down the centre of my model, 4 pairs of cogs gave the rotation of the main shaft a 90 degree twist 'upwards' meaning that ABQX & the Argo RF hood could all be turned simultaneously. It was trialed sucessfully but the complete assembly never made it through to finish. But it would have worked. The only problem with the method being that once the turrets pass 90 degrees abeam, they start to point acutely or inwardly (if you follow).

But that is an example of the mini-engineering that could turn prop shafts.

[Pondweed]

p.s. I've just read that each complete side of armour was erected in the workshop to test for fit prior to sending the plates to the shipyard. The minds boggles at the energy expended.

I've just got a book that appears to show this.

2 photographs of Beardmores 'Armour plate errection shed' show a floor area of 70-80ft? long, the floor is of steel pierced with a several rows of holes to locate a support jig that hold these plates firmly. They can't possibly assemble a complete length of side belt as the length of the pierced steel floor appears to limit this.

The two photos show two sections of armour belt, maybe 35-50ft long, one is of two tiers and the other of three, of assembled armour plates but it is laid horizontally upon it's side.

The ships vertical side armour, at Beardmores at least, is trial fitted in sections horizontally.

The book is Thomas & Pattersons "Dreadnaughts: A Photographic History".

[Pondweed]

As a matter of interest the British battlecrusiers also took quite a pounding and a good number survived heavy damage. Their reputation has been scared by the three blowing up which was really caused by poor amunition handling and excessivly volatile cordite charges.
 
What is missing is a balanced perspective as the ships covers which would have showed how well the surviving battlecrusiers withstood comparable damage along with all the photographs were thrown out and destroyed in an act of administrative vandalism decades ago so there are few comparitive pictures.
 
Damage pictures I have seen on capital ships are:
 
Lion and Q turret also inside damage to Lion at Dogger bank and external picture of forecastle after DB.
Tiger hole in 6" side armour and Q turret
Collosus damage to superstraucture
Warspite damage to stern
Side view of Lion on way home from Jutland - this is interesting as the draft of the ship appears unchanged
 
There must have been a pictorial survey of the damaged ships Lion, Princess Royal, Tiger, Warspite, Barham, Valiant, Marlborough (torpedo) but they all seem to have disapeared. Maybe we could arrange for an internet search to see if any pictures can be found out there?
 
Geoff

Geoff
where did you hear about this (administrative vandalism)? I know why there's no photographs of some (all?) Devonport built dreadnaughts during their construction: apparently any that were taken were a victim of the blitz! Other than general side-view portraits of Lion that appeared as postcards, I know of no images of her "as completed", pre re-structuring appearence.

There was some sort of record* taken of the battlecruiser damage after Jutland: on Lion it appears to be a photo of each shell hit or area of damage. A couple of them appear in Fawcett and Hoopers book "Fighting at Jutland".

Warspites damage was well recorded and Tiger appears to have had photographers cover the damage. There's a very high-quality photograph of Princess Royals Jutland damage survive so I'd be very surpised if the cameraman arrived onboard and only took that solitary photograph.

So as you mention, it's not a question of what was taken, it's a question of what survives.

p.s. According to Cambell, Lion didn't have any under-water hits at Jutland, it was Dogger bank!

* This was most likely Admiralty inspired to record the damage for authoring reports, further research, etc,. There was a report compiled by Jellicoe on the damage each ship sustained along with a drawing of the ships outline with red & green highlights to illustrate the position of hits to either side, to back that up were a series of sketches of these damaged areas.

Several sketches are very close to surviving photographs which makes me wonder if someone drew or traced photographs? I'm not saying the Tiger photograph below was drawn, I wonder if a photograph taken a few days earlier, when the deck planks where still there, was drawn/traced? It's a thought...

[Geoff]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the "ships covers" which contain all the details together with pictures and action damage were thrown out in the 50's - 60's which is why you tend to only see the same pictures again and again.
 
Whilst I don't recall seeing the sketches I recognise the top left as the roof plate from Tiger "Q" I think when taken off and resting on the deck.
 
I find it inconcievable that hundreds of pictures were not taken of action damage by the navy so where are they? It is possible they were destroyed in the blitz - any evidence of that, but this would suggest copies wern't made and distributed elsewhere.
 
Anybody got any idea how we can collectivley research this - maybe try to set ap a specific thread/file with Jutland/Dogger bank action shots to colate the available material.
 
From everything I have read I am convinced there was a serious problem with our cordite which was never fully resolved. I seem to recall a test was done pre ww1 with a pile placed on a field and all the experts said it would just flare up, which is what it should have done. The explosion was significant with a great crater in the ground! The experts were silent but I suspect whilst this was known there was little that could be done to correct the problem and it was hidden away as shells were unlilkly to penetrate a magazine directly. What they couldn't anticipate was the stupid attitude in the battlecrusier fleet of chasing rates of fire and stockpiling cordite and leaving magazine doors open to save a few seconds.
 
Cordite should flare like a match head and not go off suddenly like black powder. It was a relativly slow explosive crafted to push the shells out of the barrel at an increasing rate hence the long barrells.
 
Early pictures of the US navy using black powder showed the Dalgren guns (shaped like a fat coke bottle) as massive barrell width was required at the near end to take the sudden shock of black powder exploding.
 
As Beatty said, "something wrong with our bloody ships today" Not the ships but the actual cordite and the handling of it.
 
Just my thoughts
 
Geoff
 

[Pondweed]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the "ships covers" which contain all the details together with pictures and action damage were thrown out in the 50's - 60's which is why you tend to only see the same pictures again and again.
 
Whilst I don't recall seeing the sketches I recognise the top left as the roof plate from Tiger "Q" I think when taken off and resting on the deck.
 
I find it inconcievable that hundreds of pictures were not taken of action damage by the navy so where are they? It is possible they were destroyed in the blitz - any evidence of that, but this would suggest copies wern't made and distributed elsewhere.
 
Anybody got any idea how we can collectivley research this - maybe try to set ap a specific thread/file with Jutland/Dogger bank action shots to colate the available material.
 
From everything I have read I am convinced there was a serious problem with our cordite which was never fully resolved. I seem to recall a test was done pre ww1 with a pile placed on a field and all the experts said it would just flare up, which is what it should have done. The explosion was significant with a great crater in the ground! The experts were silent but I suspect whilst this was known there was little that could be done to correct the problem and it was hidden away as shells were unlilkly to penetrate a magazine directly. What they couldn't anticipate was the stupid attitude in the battlecrusier fleet of chasing rates of fire and stockpiling cordite and leaving magazine doors open to save a few seconds.
 
Cordite should flare like a match head and not go off suddenly like black powder. It was a relativly slow explosive crafted to push the shells out of the barrel at an increasing rate hence the long barrells.
 
Early pictures of the US navy using black powder showed the Dalgren guns (shaped like a fat coke bottle) as massive barrell width was required at the near end to take the sudden shock of black powder exploding.
 
As Beatty said, "something wrong with our 'blinking!' ships today" Not the ships but the actual cordite and the handling of it.
 
Just my thoughts
 
Geoff

Sorry for not adding more background. The page with the 4 sketches of Tiger is her entry in the forementioned report from Jellicoe to the Admiralty. Each ship damaged in battle had 1, 2 or 3 pages full of sketches of damage. I included one of Tigers pages.


It was the ship construction images for Devonport built ships that were destroyed in the blitz, the story comes from the forementioned book, "Dreadnaughts: A Photographic History".

There are bits & pieces out there of Lion on the stocks but it sounds like any sort of organised chronological photograph taking, similar in scope to what remains of the J Brown built battlecruisers, went up in the flames.

In the book above, the only photographs of the Dreadnaught 'Lion' are a newspaper photograph of the hull going down the slipway and the photographs from the Dock Museum, Barrow-in-furness, showing the boilers & turbine construction.

The Anatomy of the ship book on Warspite, another devonport-built dreadnaught, contains no 'during construction' photographs in the book.

[dodes]

Should imagine all photographs which you talk off, will now be in either the national maritime museum or the imperial war museum, along with all other info and ship drawings. In recent years the Naval Photographic Unit passes all photographs and negatives etc to the Imperial Museum as a natural course of action after 3 years storage. As to cordite, I was involved with RN Clearance divers searching the wreck of HMS Drake (sunk in WW1 ) for cordite in 1978, as it was known then that the IRA was then retrieving cordite from her time to time to make incendiary bombs. The chief diver in front of me touched the end off a single length of the stuff with a lit cigarette, where upon it began to burn immediately. They emptied a copper container off the stuff onto an island some 100 yds from my vessel then ignited it, sent immediately sent a flame over a hundred foot high and the heat felt on board from it was very intense, considering the day temperature was about 8 degrees.