Print

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

[ballastanksian]

Imagine being in Indefatigables cordite store when hers went hot. Frightening image. Was the copper container one of the original charge cases that they fitted magazines out with?

[Pondweed]

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.

Well you'd imagine wrongly, they're certainly not there unless some odd snapshots lie in personal RN officers albums un or mis-catalogued or maybe the albums of ancillairy firms that helped equip the ship(s) similarily un/miscatalogued.

The plans are there.

[Geoff]

okay, can now attach but pictures too large. Windows XP any idea how I make them smaller?

Thanks

Geoff

[Tug-Kenny RIP]

There are articles about this in the Chit Chat section.


k

[Geoff]

Okay, here we go. More to follow. The pictures are really self explanatory.
 
Regards
 
Geoff

[Geoff]

More

[Geoff]

Hmm, they seem to have come in an odd order but never mind. The close up of the superstructure shows the cortecine brass hold down strips together with part of one of the funnels and "B" turret structure.
 
The turrets have now been completed with alloy roof plates and the sides painted. Just need to manufacture the roof range finders and paint the roofs, a darker grey.
 
I had a lot of trouble with the roof plates as some pictures show a curved format and others show a more tent like shape. I have found conflicting pictures of each, always assuming the pictures have been captioned correctly. In the end I have gone for the more tent like structure and given it taked me one hour to make one set of plates I'm not doing them all for a third time!
 
Hope you like the pictures.
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
 
 

[Geoff]

One more.

[Bob K]

At last - the photo's.  Well worth the wait.  She is looking really superb.
I look forward to following the rest of this build with great interest. 

[ballastanksian]

I cannot say with certainty, but different builders might have built their turrets slightly different. One of the Battlecruisers had different types of gun houses as some were electric and others were traditional hydralic, so you may find some have round roofs and others had angular ones.

Mind you, did the Navy not have gun house roofs reinforced with extra plates during WW1? If so would this not have covered rounded roofs with flat plate; easier to work and fit??

The images have been worth the wait Geoff! The plating alone is gorgeous, while everything elses oozes the majesty of a Battleship.

[Geoff]

Thank you for your kind comments. I may try a slightly larger file size as some of the detail is a little blurred. HMS Invincible had different turret designs amidships as two of her turrets were built electic powered and two hydraulic and the turrets were quite different in design. The electirc system did not work well and was replaced with a hydraulics just before ww1.
 
There was additional 1" plating added after Jutland to turret roofs and this was bolted on and the bolts can readily be seen in many pictures but I think it would have followed the shape of the original structure. I'm inclined to agree there were just differences between the classes. I've also looked at the preceeding KGV and Orion classes and they seem to have differences too.
 
The benefit of building a ship of this vintage is that it highly unlikly I will meet anyone who says "I was there and that's not right!"
 
Cheers
 
Geoff

[ballastanksian]

Not only that but it is your hobby, your enjoyment and your limit of accuracy is balanced between budget, time, end use and tolerance of small detail.

In all hobbies there are a whole range of people from the person who is happy to get it looking like the real thing from forty feet away up to the person who wants to recreate the real thing but in a smaller scale, and loads of people in between.

The person who walks up to you at a show and says that they were on it, may have been on it in her later days as a training ship, possibly without a whole load of weapons and stuff and covered with sheds etc, so even then it will be loads different from how she looked sailing at Jutland.

Rule no1, have fun:O)

[derekwarner]

  ....and Geoff says...."the benefit of building a ship of this vintage is that it highly unlikely I will meet anyone who says "I was there and that's not right!"

This is all so true Geoff, however if you base some semi questionable design issue and progress on with the model in the resemblance of an image....just make up a photocopy folder of images and casually have this folder handy when you display the vessel...this can dispel even the most questioning of critic 

Extensive research would suggest orders were placed for a number of vessels of a certain Class......plates rolled & punched...& 1/2 way through the build of the 2nd or 3rd in the Class....some Lord of the Admiralty would Order a revision or change ........just as you mention with the additional armour plating over certain turrets roof structures post a conflict

Keep the images coming thru...... ... Derek

[Geoff]

Okay, should get some more pictures up very shortly now that I have resolved my computer issues. Everything seems to take so long, I spend 6 hours building and can't really see much difference. Engines and props have now been mounted, greased and fitted internally. I still have some work to do getting the belt tensions right and to provide some spares, just in case.

Tomorrow's pictures will show the forward superstructure, funnels and aft superstructure together with the finished turrets, absent guns.

In case I forget to mention it the pictures show a gap under the forward superstructure and a missing deck on the aft superstructure. There will be a wire mesh deck there. The deck and gap is there so I can place the sound speakers for the gunfire effect - the sound has to have some way of getting out!

I may loose some realism but by the same token hope to gain more with the gunfire system. If this works I should get maybe as much as 600 shots (If my maths is right) yes 600 repeatable shots! Smoke, flash and noise with no pyrotechnics! If this all works as planned (big IF!) then I plan to publish full details in due course.

One of the problems is how to turn the turrets and link it all to the gunfire system and still be able to remove the deck to get at the internals. The round objects in front of the hull are the barbette bases, one for each turret. A and Y are the same. Q is slightly higher and B and X are the superimposed turrets. I plan to use my usual system of winching the turrets round using bowden cables attached to modified servos which give 180 degrees rotation and automatic return to center line.

Lots to do to ensure she is finished in time for 31  May, 2016!

Pictures to follow

Cheers

Geoff

[ballastanksian]

Crikey, I look forward to seeing these images! Lots to absorb especialy that gunfire system.

[Geoff]

Okay, now lets try the pictures!
 
In terms of the gunfire system the basic principle is to have a large box under A & B, Q and X & Y turrets. Each box contains a smoke generator so three in all.
 
There will be two valves at the top which connect a 6mm pipe to one gun in A turret and one gun in B turret. There is a separate 1" square valve behind which rests a computer fan motor.
 
The other guns in A and B will contain a very high intensity LED to give the flash, with the whole lot connected to a sound module for the "bang".
 
Sequence of operation is as follows:
 
1) Smoke generator on  for 3 seconds to fill the box - all valves shut
 
2) Open valves for 1.5 Seconds and shut offf the smoke generator, initiate the fan for the same time and initiate the LED flash for half second and the sound module
 
3) Switch off fan and close the vlaves simutaneously
 
4) Repeat as required
 
On a practical basis all turrets will operate at the same time so I get a salvo of 5 shots. The smoke generators typically draw 3 amps at 12 volts so 9 amps in all but lets call it 10 amps for 3 seconds for each salvo of 5 shots.
 
Lets start with a 10amp hour 12 volt battery which is nominaly 10 amps for one hour or one amp for 10 hours. I know this doesn't work in practice and is an over simplification but let's continue.
 
There are 60 seconds in a minutes and 60 minutes in an hour so 60 x 60 = 3,600 seconds all in divided by 3 seconds = 1,200 theoretical shots. If we use a factor of 50% we get 600 salvos minimum which x 5 (1 for each turret) = 3,000 shots over all. Now this all seems to be far too high so even if we multiply this by 50% again we get 300 salvos and 1,500 shots. You get the picture. Even if the current consumption is 6 amps this would halve everything again (may need to make the smoke generators work faster) we still get 150 salvos and 750 shots!
 
I'm fairly sure there is a flaw in my maths but believe the concept to be sound and I can always add another battery, or two, given eht size of Iron Duke to make up for any shortfall.
 
As always the devil is in the detail, how to construct and operate the valves and sequencing but I believe the theory to be sound.
 
Do please let me have any thoughts please
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
 
 
G

[Geoff]

Just as an add on, if you zoom in to the director control unit on the foretop you can see the director sights!
 
G

[ballastanksian]

Gorgeous work geoff! Another top build.

How much pressure are you going to create with the generator? I ask because the guns on the super dreadnoughts put out quite a plume of dirty smoke beyond the muzzle, and while the LED will create a good flash increased by the smoke, will enough smoke be created to recreate the cloud?

You should get a better effect with a particulate based cloud of vapourised oil than you would with steam.

I had the idea of using small black powder charges and flour bursters in brass gun tubes suitably detailed like scale gun barrels set off when at a safe distance from my friends and I, and using a simple electrical actuator from the transmitter. It would only give you one discharge.

Naturally, I would get a black powder liscence first

Whatever happens, you are taking us on an adventure and I am interested in your developments.

[derekwarner]

Geoff....here  is an image of the same 6" secondary MKVI gun mounts however from HM battleship Kent...an earlier Class, however the same [single] mounts were as used on the HM Duke

Interestingly, the image shows doors that could open over the mantlet plate as weather protection......the lower mount also displays the centre cover lowered down

This also asks the begging question...were the barrels withdrawn from the firing position or and maintenance when not in action?

Looking forward to more images & detail of the build...... Derek

[ballastanksian]

This is pertinent to Colin Bishop's query about ninteenth century armament and how it was stowed.

[derekwarner]

Yes Ian...........I have commented on that thread and hence what I was eluding to here......

If we assume the mounts on HM Kent were on the STBD side, it would appear that the AFT mantlet cover could swing out to greater than 90 degrees to STBD [we can see the cover hinges in the vertical plane and the rope]...we also see the centre cover lowered .....again of assumed wire rope].......

What is more confusing here is the centre cover for the lower mount appears to be of one piece construction, whereas the centre cover for the upper mount appears to be in two halves ie., each opening outwards

If the lower centre cover is in fact of this one piece lowerable configuration would suggest that the barrel would need to be fully withdrawn prior to lifting/closing the cover......... Derek

However having seen this I don't know  if we will ever find a conclusion......Derek

[derekwarner]

Geoff....with respect to the rate of fire for these 13.5" guns......a good reference is ....http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_135-45_mk5.htm

This confirms a ROF of between 1.5 and 2 firings per barrel per minute.....

So even at the best ROF, you should expect 30 salvos per hour.......multiplied by the sq root of scale of the vessel  .... Derek

[derekwarner]

Sorry .......you should expect 30 salvos per hour solar powered batteries were flat in the abacus Derek

[Geoff]

The 6" guns shown are in whats called casemates and they did indeed include lots of little doors to seal them away from the weather and were designed to fit exactly round the gun barrels. They were either lowered or removed before battle. Some hinged up, some hinged down which ever was more practical.
 
As to whether the 6" guns could be withdrawn depends entirely on the date of the mounting. "Vaseur" mountings were on a slide and dated from the 1890's and I believe these could indeed be slid back inside as the recoil was on the slide. Later mountings which were pedestal mounted and were generally lighter had different recoil systems and I don't believe they could be withdrawn into the ships, hence the complex shutter arrangements.
 
Iron Duke had pedestal mounted guns with small circular shields and had shutter doors which could be dropped before action but they caught the water. They were removed before commissioning and India Rubber joints were fitted between the gun shield and surrounding structure which eased matters considerably.
 
This gave rise to the standard 6" secondary battery design/appearance seen in Iron Duke , Tiger, Queen Elizabeth and the Revenge classes that followed.
 
On a practical basis there was always a problem in keeping the batteries watertight and the tendancy was to have a long line of guns rather like a sailing ship as this gave very effective gunnery control but but this exposed powder and shot to a single hit (Malaya or Barham at Jutland).
 
In terms of pressure within my proposed gunfire system. I have no way of measuring it but it would be very low. I built a test rig some years ago and whilst it worked there were a number of problems which at the time I couldn't readily resolve albeit the volme of smoke comming out the barrel was quite adequate:
 
1) It leaked smoke from every orifice!
2) The smoke blew back past the computer fan!
3) the smoke came out in a jet rather like water as opposed to an explosion.
 
Items 1) and 2) are just engineering/detail solutions which I believe I have now resolved - Where I went wrong was to switch the fan on to pressurise the system and then open the valves. The answer is very simply to open the valves first then there is somewhere for the smoke to go, so a sequencing issue.
 
Item 3) may be resolved simply by the motion of the model through the water, otherwise a very small deflector cone at the end of the muzzle should gause the smoke to expand in all directions rather than a jet but also a lot would depend on from what side you saw the smoke.
 
I actually use fog fluid to produce the smoke so little if any residue on the model and any that condenses inside the smoke chamber can just drain back to the smoke generator.
 
Thats the plan anyway!
 
I spent 1.5 hours last night doing the first piece of railings round the top of the searchlight platform on the second funnel. Odd shapes are always hard to do so I can't wait to tackle the forwatd superstructure!
 
Found a source of 1 meter lengths of 0.5mm brass wire from "4D model shop.co.uk" which is in London and walking distance from my office 74 pence a piece. This goes through the John Haynes stanchions easier than the 0.6mm copper wire which I used for the searchlight platform. The copper has the advantage of being more malleable but the brass will be better for the long lengths along the ships side.
 
I'll try to post some more pictures when there is something to show.
 
Thanks for the feedback.
 
Cheers
 
Geoff
 
 

[Geoff]

Railings, railings and more railings with ladders! This was quite challenging due to the complex shapes and the need to have three identical rails with everything. The 0.6mm copper wire was ideal as it was very maleable but this was still very very time consuming!
 
The canvas dodgers are ordinary masking tape as this has a cloth like outer appearance and is self adhesive. I folder the tape over the top rail for about 3mm so it sticks to itself. This was then painted a mediaum/light gret both inside and outside to waterproof it and to make it stick to the rails more. In practive some bits have come unstuck a little but this should be easily glued down again. I may paint the outside a slightly lighter grey but importantly you can see the rails shape which is what was intended.
 
Cheers
 
Geoff