Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Pak75

Members
  • Content Count

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Good

About Pak75

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sydney

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. HI Here goes, maiden WIP. I bought this kit in early 00s while in UK - i have always been fascinated by idea of building a fully rigged 18th century square rigger. There are many models available on market costing $$$ and my thinking was that I could use the Airfix model to do this comparatively cheaply... Fast forward 15 years, with enforced time on my hands I am picking up modelling tools again and hope to work through my stash of kits. First step was to research HMS Bounty and find out what were the differences between Airfix kit and other models on the market. The internet is awash with photos of models and even full size replicas which gave me plenty of inspiration but each one seems to have a different colour scheme and slight variations in deck layout and other details. Some great model photos here: https://www.modelships.de/Bounty_II/Photos_Bounty_II_details.htm I found an excellent discussion by Prof John Tilley on merits or otherwise of Revell and Airfix kits here: http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/7/t/155394.aspx A problem for modellers/researchers is that the Bounty began life as a simple civilian merchantman and was bought by RN to convert for shipping breadfruit from Pacific to feed the slave trade. Therefore there are few drawings of the Bounty that exist. There are, however, fortunately some docs on-line that show conversion plans where Bligh's master cabin was converted to transport the breadfruit; eg see Australian website State Library of Victoria and National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Colour scheme is therefore very much up to individual modellers as no record of paint scheme exists, although given that copper sheathing was applied by the RN, the Bounty may well have been in colours of British warships of the era. Who knows? https://viewer.slv.vic.gov.au/?entity=IE5772686&mode=browse I got a copy of McKay's The Anatomy of a Ship- HMS Bounty and decided to use this as a basis for my model but even this book has a major error in that stove chimney is the wrong way round compared with Admiralty drawings. Prof Tilley's articles are very helpful but IMHO Tilley is also guilty of promulgating incorrect idea that anchor hawses went through the foredeck. See Anatomy drawings for correct installation. The Airfix hull is generally accurate (compared to Anatomy), main issues are a badly modelled knighthead (curved raised parts either side of bowsprit), an inaccurately sloping deck, hawse holes too low and a weird breasthook. There are also no stern lanterns or pin rails or chocks for launch. A strange issue I have noticed is that the brown plastic of the kit is very brittle, much more so than newer kits. Normal polystyrene cement does not seem to work well and i am using much CA. Many of the parts have shrinkage requiring a lot of putty. Original model came out in 1987 and this is plastic moulding from that era, ie over 30 years ago. Starting point was to get the slope of the deck correct and to therefore to get hawse holes in right position. Working backwards from Anatomy as to correct location of hawse holes, the deck slope could be deduced and new supports glued in place... Most of Airfix knighthead was cut away and remaining knighthead reinforced with plastic strip to resemble Anatomy drawings. Doubting my ability to reproduce a painted timber deck finish, I came up with the idea of laying thin planks on the plastic. There is actually a ready made timber deck cut to shape for this Airfix kit available from US but is very expensive to ship to Australia (isn't everything?) https://www.amazon.com/Premium-Wood-Deck-Bounty-Airfix/dp/B079146JZS Then I found on Bluejacket site in US sheets of decking that could be cut to size - much cheaper and i could order rigging fittings at same time. Deck sheet duly arrived and to my horror was 1mm thick ( must have misread thousandths of inches which US deal in) which would throw out deck hatches, etc so next step was to raise hatch coamings and hatches by 1mm. I did not like kit solid gratings so replaced them with 1mm square wooden gratings. Chocks for cutter/launch added. I bought some sheets of Evergreen polystyrene of various thicknesses thinking that i could cut to size whatever i needed but this was most unsatisfactory. Strange how modelling knives seem to have lives of their own when cutting strips, etc. Rushed out and bought Evergreen strips! This tendency for knife to wander was even more pronounced with softer timber- to cut the planking sheet to fit over deck exactly seemed to be too difficult with no room for error so i decided to do planking in two halves, divided by a 4mm plank down centreline of ship (which is represented on Airfix kit). Of course, adding 1mm to deck thickness threw out my original deck slopes so i had to redo supports for deck. Along the way i decided to replace kit quarter gallery windows with transparent plastic. First attempt with Dremel saw to cut out windows resulted in destruction of port windows altogether so these had to be rebuilt. Plastic is very thick here and difficult to work (a bad workman always blames his tools).... Starboard windows much more successful and i decided to not use transparent plastic but just leave them open. This means i will have to do same to stern windows.... oh, well! Pencilled on ends of planks. Assembly of hull halves and deck was next, many dry-runs, much cursing and CA but looks okay Have started experimenting with painted wood finishes as you can see for hatches, coamings and balustrade. Next step to paint hull and install deck fittings. Cheers
  2. HI Stuart So my build has been progressing slowly but satisfactorily. I'll show you mine if you show me yours? Cheers
  3. HI My ceaseless pinging of internet and looking at countless U-boat images in trying to resolve this question was rewarded when I received an echo from Jerry Mason, the brains behind excellent www.uboatarchive.net site. Jerry confirmed that muzzle doors and outer bow doors/shutters are operated simultaneously by same hand crank from torpedo room. Outer bow doors are connected to muzzle doors by either hinge or linkage. Therefore whitestar12chris was correct in citing reference from http://www.ubootwaffe.pl/en/u-boats/equipment/torpedo-tubes-of-german-u-boats As U-boat development continued during the war, this simultaneous opening mechanism for muzzle and bow doors was refined for Type IX boats and then the Type XXI. So as not to confuse matters, I will make a new topic for these craft if anyone is interested and confine this thread to Type VII. Jerry also supplied a photo of type VIIc on a slipway showing bow doors open and muzzle doors completely hidden behind the open bow doors. This photo is apparently typical of type VIIc boats and Jerry has never seen any other arrangement. Therefore I have to conclude that second/bottom picture in my original post is correct. No wonder RCSubs would not answer my question as any detail of the muzzle doors from their kit is effectively hidden by open bow doors. The mechanism for this is detailed in a diagram in Westwood’s Anatomy of a Ship – Type VII U-boat. A hinge for the outer bow door is attached to the muzzle doors pivot hinge at one end and to a pin within a slot on the inside of outer bow door at the other. As muzzle door is cranked open, the hinge pin initially just slides in its slot in outer bow door, allowing the moving muzzle door to pass behind the still stationary outer bow door. The hinge pin eventually reaches the end of the slot and as the muzzle door continues to open, this forces the outer bow door to begin to move inwards until the fully open position is reached. An interesting detail that few modellers/manufacturers seem to have picked up on is that ends of torpedo tubes are angled inwards so muzzle door has to open less than 90 degrees. Cheers
  4. Well to be honest, Tilley only used the plastic hull, the rest was scratchbuilt........
  5. Here is another useful tome from 1794 This can be found online: https://maritime.org/doc/steel/index.htm Bit short of diagrams but interesting none the less. Cheers
  6. Hi I have just found on www that John Tilley passed away two years ago. As he is therefore unlikely to upgrade his Photobucket account, I have posted two other images of his HMS Bounty for posterity and ship modellers everywhere present and future. Cheers
  7. HI Chris Thanks yr reply. I must confess that i was considering posing this question on ubootwaffe.pl but as they don't speak much English i thought i would try here first. This is also a good site: http://www.tvre.org/en/home-page What started this was a purchase of RCSubs PE kits for this scale U-Boat. In the kit are optional doors or shutters - I asked RCSubs twice what they were for but got no answer other than if i thought parts were 'bad' to not use them. Incorrect text deleted Last night i found photo U-505 (a type IXc) which clearly shows muzzle door mechanism. Incorrect text deleted There is this one of U-505 which appears to show edge of open muzzle door resting against open bow door but this would mean the bow door opened first... or is is just the photograph angle? It would be a pity to have to conceal open PE muzzle doors behind open bow doors. Another thing that occurred to me is that U-505 being a type IX may have had different mode of operation for bow doors as photo suggests they might have slid forward somehow as they opened? However, RCSUbs (known for their historical accuracy) claim their torpedo PE set with optional shutters is suitable for all type VIIs but these shutters are not supplied in type IXc kits. Cheers Note bars on limber holes to prevent entry objects into bow compartment.
  8. Hi In my stash of kits is a U-boat Revell 1/144 Type VIIC/41 and while looking for information and inspiration on internet, i noticed something about representations of open outer bow doors and muzzle doors on torpedo tubes. Some models have muzzle door open against (in front) of open bow door - so outer bow doors must have opened first. Other models have open muzzle door behind open bow door - so muzzle door must have opened first. EG Muzzle door in front: Or Muzzle door behind... Anyone know which is correct sequence for opening of muzzle doors and outer bow doors? Thanks
  9. Hi I have activated postimage - thanks Stuart. Photos of Prof John Tilley's model deserve to be seen by everyone so here are two for examples of rigging and a suggested colour scheme:
  10. HI My citing of FSM site was simply to provide some information in response to a question from a member and stimulate debate. AFAIK and happy to be corrected, the copper plating was introduced primarily to combat the destructive effects of the marine borer, Teredo navalis, or shipworm. The additional general antifouling properties of the copper plates in retarding the growth of weed and barnacles etc were a secondary benefit. Mdesaxe's comments re colour are very helpful, certainly the formation of the green verdigris patina requires water and air so that the copper can oxidise which is why we see it on copper on land. Below the waterline, the hull would be exposed to considerably smaller concentrations of oxygen so no verdigris. I will look at paint charts for a salmon pink colour.... but might leave a few plates in metallic copper. Re crew - even in harbour or at anchor there was an organised watch so some officers and crew would have been present - routine maintenance was also done at anchor. Not much help, I'm afraid
  11. HI If you look at photos of HMS Victory she does indeed have thick black band at waterline which was a form of crude anti-fouling to prevent weed growth. This 'waterline' was so thick that at anchor in relatively calm waters the copper hull would not be exposed. That said, there is some discussion of hull copper colour here. http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/7/t/169491.aspx The colour chosen for the model would be representative of time elapsed on the voyage (Bounty only lasted three years) and amount of weed and growth for the point in time you want to portray., ie colour could range from brand new copper plates soon after refitting to extensive algae and barnacle growth. Cheers
  12. HI Stuart Not heard of postimage but will check it out, thanks. Yes, the rigging is daunting and the simplified Airfix instructions become immediately redundant. You only have to look at Prof Tilley's photos to see how many lines there are (though last time I looked Photobucket has generously blurred the images). IMHO, modelling a square rigger without sails would be like building a Spitfire kit without an engine. Most modellers seem to agree vacuum formed sails are not very good so I am keen to try other techniques. Part of the fun for me has been to look at rigging diagrams and books to understand exactly how a ship works. Every line has a purpose... Again, I don't know how things will go but maybe will do some sails in use and others furled. At present, scribing of planks on inside of gunwales has been a real pain! Trying to make plastic look like wood is another......
  13. HI Stuart Thanks for invitation but I'm not sure my modelling skills will match my research skills and I don't have a photo hosting subscription yet. This will be a first for me and am trying new techniques and fittings so will see how i go before posting anything.
  14. Hi By coincidence I started researching and building this kit two months ago. A problem for researchers is that the Bounty began life as a simple civilian merchantman and was bought by RN to convert for shipping breadfruit from Pacific to feed slaves. Therefore there are few drawings of the Bounty that exist. There are however some docs on-line that show conversion plans where Bligh's master cabin was converted to transport the breadfruit; eg see Australian website State Library of Victoria. Colour scheme is therefore very much up to individual modellers. https://viewer.slv.vic.gov.au/?entity=IE5772686&mode=browse The Anatomy of a Ship is available free on Scribe. As Mdesaxe has pointed out, even Anatomy book has a major error in that stove chimney is the wrong way round compared with Admiralty drawings. Prof Tilley's articles are very helpful on FSM site but IMHO Tilley is also guilty of promulgating incorrect idea that anchor hawses went through the foredeck. See Anatomy drawings for correct installation. The Airfix hull is generally accurate (compared to Anatomy), main issues are a badly modelled knighthead (curved raised parts either side of bowsprit), an inaccurately sloping deck, hawse holes too low and a weird breasthook. There are also no stern lanterns or pin rails or chocks for launch. A strange issue I have noticed is that the brown plastic of the kit is very brittle, much more so than newer kits. However these are not insurmountable problems if you have the time to fix them! I have done this and am replacing all deadeyes, blocks etc with wooden items to rig the ship as accurately as possible. I hope to do sails in same way as Jersey Frankie on the Model Ship World site (Nautical research Guild. In this way i hope (hah!) to get a decent accurate large scale model for considerably less money than the wooden kits currently available. Cheers
  15. Thanks Black Night and Jun, that's excellent!
×
×
  • Create New...