Topic: HMS Glorious 1917 (Read 25532 times)

raflaunches · « **Reply #125 on:** February 19, 2022, 03:54:22 pm »

Some trial fitting today to see what can fit inside the hull which when you take in to account the access is less than it looks! So we will need the following SLA batteries:
4x 12v (2 per drive system and 1 per turret firing system)
4x 6v (2 joined to make 12v for smoke generator, 1 for rx and servos, 1 for ballast)

As a rough estimate using the scale converter for weight it equates to approx 23kg or approx 51lb. Currently the hull and the batteries tried so far only come to approx 18kg (39.6lb)! I think we are going to have to get the hull sealed up and see what it really needs to ballast to the waterline as 5kg is a lot of ballast to add!
We have used an average weight of the real Glorious of approx 20,000 imperial tons using the scale converter. If it proves to be true she becomes the second heaviest model we have made!

Geoff · « **Reply #126 on:** February 21, 2022, 11:41:25 am »

Nice to see progress on this very interesting model. Just one question, how did you get the model tom stay on the wall!

Cheers

Geoff

ballastanksian · « **Reply #127 on:** February 22, 2022, 09:09:54 pm »

To be fair Nick, while 5KG is a lot of weight, you have a lot of hull! She'll be a burley lass when completed.

raflaunches · « **Reply #128 on:** February 23, 2022, 01:35:44 pm »

Hi Ian

Yes there is still plenty of space to add the extra ballast if needed- we are going to leave the deck off until full ballast trials are carried out as it may have to be permanent.
I didn’t think I’d be able to reply from my current location but things have turned out better than expected in sunny Cyprus!

ballastanksian · « **Reply #129 on:** February 24, 2022, 09:49:43 am »

Have a good tour.

Rob47 · « **Reply #130 on:** February 24, 2022, 10:05:28 am »

Quote from: raflaunches on February 23, 2022, 01:35:44 pm

Hi Ian

Yes there is still plenty of space to add the extra ballast if needed- we are going to leave the deck off until full ballast trials are carried out as it may have to be permanent.
I didn’t think I’d be able to reply from my current location but things have turned out better than expected in sunny Cyprus!

Keo time and Mteaksa Brandy

raflaunches · « **Reply #131 on:** February 24, 2022, 01:12:53 pm »

No time for Keo- supposed to be a dry detachment!

raflaunches · « **Reply #132 on:** March 12, 2022, 01:43:02 pm »

Pictures of deck being fitted by Dad. Hopefully I’ll get to see it for real next Saturday

Martin (Admin) · « **Reply #133 on:** March 12, 2022, 01:57:09 pm »

raflaunches · « **Reply #134 on:** March 14, 2022, 04:37:36 pm »

Thanks Martin for the picture editing

Some more updates from the weekend in the workshop by dad:

Geoff · « **Reply #135 on:** March 14, 2022, 05:32:55 pm »

Looking good!

Cheers

Geoff

ballastanksian · « **Reply #136 on:** March 14, 2022, 09:30:02 pm »

Mmmm, so sleek! If I were King George V, I think I would have had a moment of vanity and had her converted into a royal super yacht!

The Navy could have had her back to convert when I got bored and was looking at a newer model

She looks brilliant Steve! You are an artiste.

derekwarner · « **Reply #137 on:** March 15, 2022, 12:30:44 am »

Well Nick & Dad...it has been many years since the words 'classically attractive lines

' could be attributed to a Warship

Do we know who was actually responsible for the Courageous-class design?, or was it simply from the Naval Design Office?

Derek

raflaunches · « **Reply #138 on:** March 15, 2022, 12:42:39 am »

Hi Derek

The ship’s designer (well in charge of the design team) was the respected designer Sir Eustace Tennyson d’Eyncourt who led the design teams for a majority of WW1 vessels after Sit Phillip Watt.
She is a beautiful look ship if a little lost in what she was for- her crew certainly didn’t know!

derekwarner · « **Reply #139 on:** March 15, 2022, 01:18:25 am »

Thanks Nick.......

I did not know of this Chaps history or involvement........just shows what can be achieved from an Apprentice

to his final work

.....the WIKI people conclude.....

"d'Eyncourt created some of the most elegant and eye-pleasing warships ever designed"

Derek

ballastanksian · « **Reply #140 on:** March 18, 2022, 07:05:50 pm »

He also had a hand in the design of the first tanks! he was on the Landship Committee that worked on what a tank was and should look like, coming up with designs and ideas towards which Little Willie, 'Mother' and subsequent Rhomboid tanks came about.

raflaunches · « **Reply #141 on:** March 27, 2022, 12:52:15 pm »

Hi everyone

I thought I’d show for fun the immense size difference between Glorious and Invincible! Glorious is sitting on a small box to bring her to Invincible’s waterline revealing her origins within Fisher’s Baltic Fleet plan. In 1/96 scale Glorious is over 2ft longer but is narrower and has less draught than Invincible.

ballastanksian · « **Reply #142 on:** March 27, 2022, 02:16:06 pm »

Like a bloody Greyhound Nick! You would think that Dreadnought was a Pre-Dreadnought going by the difference in length. It is also difficult to believe that Hood was nearly 100 feet longer still!

Pass my compliments on to Steve for such a lovely model in progress. I can't wait to see her on the water.

tonyH · « **Reply #143 on:** March 27, 2022, 07:36:40 pm »

She's a real belter Nick. Those lines are fantastic and the build quality shows them off superbly. How are you at 3-point turns by the way?

Tony

Akira · « **Reply #144 on:** March 28, 2022, 02:06:12 pm »

From your pictures, it is hard to imagine that Glorious and Invicible are even the same scale.The size difference is amazing.Invicible looks to be a tender to Glorious.Incredible lines.....

raflaunches · « **Reply #145 on:** March 28, 2022, 02:29:46 pm »

Thanks everyone for the kind comments

When you also consider that Dreadnought 1906 in 1/96 scale is 4.5 inches shorter than Invincible! And even more scary… Hood is another 10 inches longer than Glorious! Considering that Glorious is designated a light cruiser is even more insane!

SteamboatPhil · « **Reply #146 on:** March 28, 2022, 06:24:45 pm »

As a straight running boat you are cheating Nick as your boat will be halfway down the course before you start

Really awesome work from Steve and yourself, will it be at Mayhem ? Cannot wait to se the beast for real

Beagle1831 · « **Reply #147 on:** March 28, 2022, 09:45:46 pm »

Fantastic!

Seeing the model makes it clearer just how much ship there is in front of the forward turret - what did they do with all that space?

Hopefully see the fleet at Wicksteed in a few months...

ballastanksian · « **Reply #148 on:** March 29, 2022, 09:34:16 pm »

That's a good point James. Some spaces must have fair echoed with emptiness.

derekwarner · « **Reply #149 on:** March 30, 2022, 01:00:16 am »

Manpower was generally located & lodged relatively closeby to strategic equipment.......Stoker Ratings close by boilers, Engine ratings close by engine spaces and Artificer ratings around armaments etc.....coal bunkers 'generally' closeby the boiler spaces, ammunitions closeby the gunmounts

So yes, that does appear to leave quite some large spaces FWD to occupy [Men & materials].........I am guessing a continuous Hollywood Boularvade companionway complete with trolley railing broken only by the watertight bulkheads

[the trolleys able to be pushed through open successive bulkhead doors without being unloaded]

It is something I had never considered, what do the Plans indicate Nick?

Derek

News:

Author Topic: HMS Glorious 1917 (Read 25532 times)