Jimkrauzlis said:Nice going, Steve!
Thanks, Jim.
Yes, done according to the plans. "nakleic na tekture o gr. 1 mm."
Modelik 1/200 Czarist Battlehsip Petropavlovsk
- Thread starter Corporal_Trim
- Start date
Thanks, Jim.
Yes, done according to the plans. "nakleic na tekture o gr. 1 mm."
Hi Steve
Looks like a difficult hull but your doinf a great job so far. More when you can.
barry
Looks like a difficult hull but your doinf a great job so far. More when you can.
barry
Hi Steve
A great start and it does look very neat
Can't wait to see how the hull turns out with all those shapes to form!!
Look forward to the next step
Rob
A great start and it does look very neat
Can't wait to see how the hull turns out with all those shapes to form!!
Look forward to the next step
Rob
jrts said:
Not so good.
I had a nagging suspicion that the thinness of the hull sections would lead to trouble, and it did. I glued on the port side bow piece and the frames really stand out noticeably in a couple of places. By that time it was too late to turn back. The convex area amidships also wrinkled badly, but I was able peel it back before the glue set up and glue in a couple of layers of cardstock on the inside to hold the shape better. Still a little shaky but a whole lot better than it was. Oh, well. It's a bit unsightly, but not bad enough to throw in the towel.
I'm going to reinforce the stern hull section before gluing it on and we'll see how that goes. Thanks for the encouragement, Rob.
Hi Steve
Its just a thought, looking at the photos the way the shapes change.
It might be worth cutting a few more formers and notching a few lengths of thick card between them to reduce the gaps.
This also could help in holding the shape and give a better curve, plus more surface to glue the plates to.
It might be my eyes but the gaps between formers just might be to big :roll:
One thing, DON'T GIVE UP
Hope it all works out
Rob
Its just a thought, looking at the photos the way the shapes change.
It might be worth cutting a few more formers and notching a few lengths of thick card between them to reduce the gaps.
This also could help in holding the shape and give a better curve, plus more surface to glue the plates to.
It might be my eyes but the gaps between formers just might be to big :roll:
One thing, DON'T GIVE UP
Hope it all works out
Rob
petropawlowsk
I am interested in this build all the more as I design my Bouvet for two years now, and spend a huge time in the design of the hull itself, each bulkhead looking to a toboggan or a chute. I did some incredible diagramms and sketches to check my design. Moreover, the broadside turrets intersect with the outerskin...each one at a different level! This thread drives me to what I guessed, until now I felt alone:
1/ the usual number of bulkheads used for papership design is not enough with this particular French shape, it doesn't allows gentle curves. I use about 50. This reminds the problems we have to deal with underwater hull, apart from the cutting of the skin. Regarding this latter point, I study the way how armour plates and turrets are arranged to finalize the best combination.
And I use as many decks as there were. The more they are, the better it is.
2/ I design the different parts of the structure to allow a double skin to wrap over.
I pay a particular attention to the thickness of the paper, it could influence the result in a bad way.
Fortunately, my ship will be painted black, on the contrary of the D'Entrecasteaux (JSC design), all white.
I am interested in this build all the more as I design my Bouvet for two years now, and spend a huge time in the design of the hull itself, each bulkhead looking to a toboggan or a chute. I did some incredible diagramms and sketches to check my design. Moreover, the broadside turrets intersect with the outerskin...each one at a different level! This thread drives me to what I guessed, until now I felt alone:
1/ the usual number of bulkheads used for papership design is not enough with this particular French shape, it doesn't allows gentle curves. I use about 50. This reminds the problems we have to deal with underwater hull, apart from the cutting of the skin. Regarding this latter point, I study the way how armour plates and turrets are arranged to finalize the best combination.
And I use as many decks as there were. The more they are, the better it is.
2/ I design the different parts of the structure to allow a double skin to wrap over.
I pay a particular attention to the thickness of the paper, it could influence the result in a bad way.
Fortunately, my ship will be painted black, on the contrary of the D'Entrecasteaux (JSC design), all white.
Hello,
just a few tipps for avoiding wrinkled hulls:
* Glue some 6-8mm wide strips of thin paper onto the sides of the formers - these give the hull sides a little more area to rest on.
* NEVER glue the hull planking to the formers - do this only when absolutely necessary at complex concave curves. Glue only at the baseplate and the deck. Attach glue tabs there, if needed. Glueing the hull planking to the formers almost guarantees that you will see deformations.
These are not my tipps, but come from Scorpio. Judge for yourself if they work or not
best regards,
Michael
just a few tipps for avoiding wrinkled hulls:
* Glue some 6-8mm wide strips of thin paper onto the sides of the formers - these give the hull sides a little more area to rest on.
* NEVER glue the hull planking to the formers - do this only when absolutely necessary at complex concave curves. Glue only at the baseplate and the deck. Attach glue tabs there, if needed. Glueing the hull planking to the formers almost guarantees that you will see deformations.
These are not my tipps, but come from Scorpio. Judge for yourself if they work or not
best regards,
Michael
Steve, I'm glad you are not giving up despite the bow skin problem, she's a beautiful build so far and I know you will find a way around any of the former problems.
Michael, Rob, Renaud (and Christoph/Scorpio by proxy ) each have some great comments on how to deal with this problem...Michael's comment about not gluing the hull plates to the formers was an eye-opener for me as I had always assumed the sides should be glued at each former, but if you think about it he is absolutely right, it just inserts another point of stress to the skin.
Keep at it, mate!
Cheers!
Jim
Michael, Rob, Renaud (and Christoph/Scorpio by proxy
) each have some great comments on how to deal with this problem...Michael's comment about not gluing the hull plates to the formers was an eye-opener for me as I had always assumed the sides should be glued at each former, but if you think about it he is absolutely right, it just inserts another point of stress to the skin.Keep at it, mate!
Cheers!
Jim
Thanks to all for your encouragement and good advice. Regarding not gluing the hull plates to the formers, that's a good one ! On this ship, it seems the transition from concave to convex means it's unavoidable to a certain extent, but I'll do that where I can.
Here's a shot of the bow section, where the worst deforming took place. The photo is actually being somewhat kind to me (for a change), to my eyes it looks a lot worse in reality.
Here's a shot of the bow section, where the worst deforming took place. The photo is actually being somewhat kind to me (for a change), to my eyes it looks a lot worse in reality.
And from astern. Here I reinforced the stern hull plate section with cardstock backing. The stiffness made it harder to work with, but resistance to deforming at the formers and wrinking improved a lot. The thing I'll do differently on the starboard side will be to leave it the original thickness in the two places where you have to cut and overlap the plate due to the curvature of the hull.
Note the mismatched darker hue of the lower armor belt section. :shock: As far as fit goes, so far so good and all mistakes have been my own. But I have to blame Modelik for this one.
Looking aft. The picture came out too dark, but it does serve to show the curvature of the hull. Looks like that armor belt has come unglued a bit also, something easily fixed.
postcard of the Poltava (Pietropavlovsk)
The same price you bought the model
http://cartes-postales.delcampe.net...eur-POLTAVA-TBE-cachet-24-Oct,language,F.html
The same price you bought the model
http://cartes-postales.delcampe.net...eur-POLTAVA-TBE-cachet-24-Oct,language,F.html
Attachments
I mentioned this in another pre-dreadnought thread, I am going to take the liberty to do so again in case any pre-dreadnought fans out there haven't heard about this.
About a year ago an excellent pc game came out covering the Russo-Japanese War, "Distant Guns" by Storm Eagle Studios. The game is exceptionally detailed, the campaign game in particular is outstanding. Anyone who likes naval sims, pre-dreadnoughts or the Russo-Japanese war might want to check this game out.
The developer just this week announced their follow-on game, "Jutland". They tripled the polygon count on the ships, so they look even more stunning.
Below I'll post a (cropped) Distant Guns screenshot.
BTW, I have no connection with this company or game. I just like pre-dreadnoughts.
Steve, sorry to post OT in your thread. Looking forward to following your build!
About a year ago an excellent pc game came out covering the Russo-Japanese War, "Distant Guns" by Storm Eagle Studios. The game is exceptionally detailed, the campaign game in particular is outstanding. Anyone who likes naval sims, pre-dreadnoughts or the Russo-Japanese war might want to check this game out.
The developer just this week announced their follow-on game, "Jutland". They tripled the polygon count on the ships, so they look even more stunning.
Below I'll post a (cropped) Distant Guns screenshot.
BTW, I have no connection with this company or game. I just like pre-dreadnoughts.
Steve, sorry to post OT in your thread. Looking forward to following your build!
