Looking for an Armored car?
- Thread starter OhioMike
- Start date
- Status
Z
Zathros
Oh my, that is beautiful. 
You got me for a couple of seconds there. I thought it was the real one that somebody was restoring or something. Are you considering making a paper one? If that's paper, I'm just gong to shoot myself right now!
You got me for a couple of seconds there. I thought it was the real one that somebody was restoring or something. Are you considering making a paper one? If that's paper, I'm just gong to shoot myself right now!
Rr ac
I'm sorry, I got distracted here and forgot to ask my question. The RR AC's have split doors on the rear of the hull, some of these doors are devided in half, some are solid and some are split about one foot from the floor. Does any one know why or which came first.
No, my "impressions/sculptures" are not paper, if I tried to explain my hobby people get confused. A picture is worth a thousand words :mrgreen:
Thanks
Jim
I'm sorry, I got distracted here and forgot to ask my question. The RR AC's have split doors on the rear of the hull, some of these doors are devided in half, some are solid and some are split about one foot from the floor. Does any one know why or which came first.
No, my "impressions/sculptures" are not paper, if I tried to explain my hobby people get confused. A picture is worth a thousand words :mrgreen:
Thanks
Jim
As I understand it: The one-piece door was on the first two prototypes; and perhaps the very earliest production models.
The two-piece ("split") doors were found to be simpler to produce, and thus became the standard fitment on the "UK Pattern" vehicles.
The foot-high door-sill (or "coaming" to use the nautical term) seems to have been a peculiarity to the early "India Pattern" RR Armoured cars, but does not in every case seem to have been carried-out in production. Even so, the "India Pattern" vehicles had split doors just as the "UK Pattern" vehicles. The major difference seems to have been in the suspension (number of leaf springs and shackle geometry), engine cooling arrangements and in ammunition stowage.
While there are differences in the armour pattern, these are relatively minor, and would only really be noticed by the most ardent of "rivet-counters".
Similarly, the steel plates over the wheel spokes of the early vehicles later become replaced by complete steel discs; outside being one-piece, inner side being two-piece, horizontally split to accommodate the axle and hub. This happens around mid 1916, despite that it is listed as being a "1919 Pattern" feature in most publications. The reason for this is that it was officially documented in 1919, but had in fact been in use for nearly 4 years by then.
Of note also: there are 8, 12, and 16 bolt versions of the steel disc wheels. Each of these patterns were employed at different times, but the most commonly seen would appear to be the 12-bolt pattern, though the others were at times seen even as late as 1941 on the vehicles as employed in Egypt.
I hope this small bit of information is of help to you.
I admit that what I have written here above may stand to be corrected by those more knowledgeable in the topic than I. I've done my best to help with what I know of it.
Kind and Respectful Regards, Uyraell.
The two-piece ("split") doors were found to be simpler to produce, and thus became the standard fitment on the "UK Pattern" vehicles.
The foot-high door-sill (or "coaming" to use the nautical term) seems to have been a peculiarity to the early "India Pattern" RR Armoured cars, but does not in every case seem to have been carried-out in production. Even so, the "India Pattern" vehicles had split doors just as the "UK Pattern" vehicles. The major difference seems to have been in the suspension (number of leaf springs and shackle geometry), engine cooling arrangements and in ammunition stowage.
While there are differences in the armour pattern, these are relatively minor, and would only really be noticed by the most ardent of "rivet-counters".
Similarly, the steel plates over the wheel spokes of the early vehicles later become replaced by complete steel discs; outside being one-piece, inner side being two-piece, horizontally split to accommodate the axle and hub. This happens around mid 1916, despite that it is listed as being a "1919 Pattern" feature in most publications. The reason for this is that it was officially documented in 1919, but had in fact been in use for nearly 4 years by then.
Of note also: there are 8, 12, and 16 bolt versions of the steel disc wheels. Each of these patterns were employed at different times, but the most commonly seen would appear to be the 12-bolt pattern, though the others were at times seen even as late as 1941 on the vehicles as employed in Egypt.
I hope this small bit of information is of help to you.
I admit that what I have written here above may stand to be corrected by those more knowledgeable in the topic than I. I've done my best to help with what I know of it.
Kind and Respectful Regards, Uyraell.
Z
Zathros
Uyrael, a big thanks. I owe you a pint, probably 2 or 3. I've asked this question on three or four forums with no replys, since I dont have a mill or lathe and no quality prints, I do my "impressions" of things I like and I have heard from "rivet counters".
I do have a question about the turret, was it rotated by hand or was there a crank and gears to move it?
Thanks again
Jim
I do have a question about the turret, was it rotated by hand or was there a crank and gears to move it?
Thanks again
Jim
Attachments
Z
Zathros
You don't have a Mill or Lathe!! Say what! How did you do this? Forget the rivet counters!:thumb:
Seriously though, how did you make the hubs for the wheels and a slew of other parts?
How did you do this? Forget the rivet counters!:thumb:Seriously though, how did you make the hubs for the wheels and a slew of other parts?
Z
Zathros
I think in Connecticut, we would call you a "Tinsmith" (that is a term of praise here). I was a Tool and Dye maker, I also programmed and operated 4 axis CNC machines and designed fixtures for these machines. I have a Miller EconoTig, and a Mig welder, a 1939, in new condition 9" Southbend Lathe. I have a really heavy duty Table Top Miller that is as solid as some of the small Bridgeports I have worked on. I welded an appropriate base for it.
Your work impresses the H*LL out of me! Ever since I broke my neck, I have lost the ability to do the kind of things I used to do, but I made recumbent bicycles and recumbent trikes, all full size stuff.. I never made anything like what you have there. Those are works of art! Thanks for sharing, and feel free to share more, please do!
Your work impresses the H*LL out of me! Ever since I broke my neck, I have lost the ability to do the kind of things I used to do, but I made recumbent bicycles and recumbent trikes, all full size stuff.. I never made anything like what you have there. Those are works of art! Thanks for sharing, and feel free to share more, please do!
Hi again,
The hubs are built from a piece of 6MM tubing drilled out for a 1/4" bolt, thats what I use for axels, the flanges are washers punched out of 18ga crs and tacked to the tubing. I would love to use .035 weld wire for spokes but no one makes a .035 punch that will pierce 18ga crs.
One of my problems is most people don't have your background and don't know what their looking at. They ask where I had the castings done or where they can get the "kit". When you explain that everything is raw stock, cut filed and tig tacked, their eyes glaze over and they walk away.
I don't mind being called a tinsmith at all, one magazine called me a tinknocker and that's fine too.
I put most of my projects on flickr. www.flickr.com/photos/closing_rivets_up.
The guys at good spark garage.com did an interview with me and posted some photos, if you have time you might check it out. I answered a lot of questions for those guys.
Thanks again for the kind words.
Jim
The hubs are built from a piece of 6MM tubing drilled out for a 1/4" bolt, thats what I use for axels, the flanges are washers punched out of 18ga crs and tacked to the tubing. I would love to use .035 weld wire for spokes but no one makes a .035 punch that will pierce 18ga crs.
One of my problems is most people don't have your background and don't know what their looking at. They ask where I had the castings done or where they can get the "kit". When you explain that everything is raw stock, cut filed and tig tacked, their eyes glaze over and they walk away.
I don't mind being called a tinsmith at all, one magazine called me a tinknocker and that's fine too.
I put most of my projects on flickr. www.flickr.com/photos/closing_rivets_up.
The guys at good spark garage.com did an interview with me and posted some photos, if you have time you might check it out. I answered a lot of questions for those guys.
Thanks again for the kind words.
Jim
Attachments
Z
Zathros
Beautiful workmanship! It is amazing what you produced, regardless of the tools you used, but knowing what you made it with, for me, makes them even more special!
Traversing Gear.
Hello Jim.
Again, this is according to my understanding of the topic, and the info is memories decades old. So, I stand to be corrected by those more knowledgeable than myself.
For shape, picture/imagine a disk an inch and a half or so thick, and about 7 inches across, behind and to one side (the right) of which is a cylinder about 4 inches in diameter and about 5 inches in height. This has a slot in it through which the teeth of the traverse gear engage with the teeth in the turret ring-gear or rimcog. {Visual clue: stand a bread and butter plate on edge, with a Thermos behind it on the right, so that the Thermos is about one-third occluded by the plate.}
I can not with accuracy tell you the diameters of the gearwheels used in turning the turret, though I seem to recall 6.5 inches was the diameter of the main cog engaged with the hand-crank. The housing was, iIrc, somewhat similar in shape to that surrounding the handcrank on a household butterchurn or heavy mincer; ie: cog coverered by a full disc forged to cover the housing. The crank in one model (of turret turning gear) was offset, in the other was centermounted in the housing. In either case, the gearing could be disengaged by using a lever which threw the turret-turn-cog out of engagement with the turret rimcog. This left the turret able to be traversed by hand, though the turret was necessarily weighty, and took a fair amount of effort to traverse by hand: usually requiring more than one man to do so in that mode.
The ratios in each model varied, but seem to have been most commonly 6-to-1 and 9-to-1. Though some sources say 12:1 and 16:1 cogs were produced and used.
I have found very scant evidence in support of this, however. Basically, one turn of the crank through 360Deg would turn the turret through 6 teeth on the rimcog/turret ring-gear.
There are two locations for the turret traverse gearing housing.
One, is at approximately the "3 o'clock" position when looking along the length of the vehicle from the rear. This would put the housing above and behind the driver's right shoulder, as it were. (RR Armoured cars being right-hand drive.)
The other location is at the "5 o'clock" position, which would put the housing behind the machinegunner's right hip.
Why there, I know not, as it seems a most awkward position in which to locate such a crucial component, but that kind of thinking seems to be peculiarly British.
I'm very glad the info I gave was of help to you Jim, for I am greatly enjoying seeing your fine work come to fruition.
Zathros my friend, the RR Armoured Cars have always fascinated me greatly, and this thread on that topic is one I have been enjoying.
Kind and Respectful Regards Jim and Zathros my friends, Uyraell.
Hello Jim.
Again, this is according to my understanding of the topic, and the info is memories decades old. So, I stand to be corrected by those more knowledgeable than myself.
For shape, picture/imagine a disk an inch and a half or so thick, and about 7 inches across, behind and to one side (the right) of which is a cylinder about 4 inches in diameter and about 5 inches in height. This has a slot in it through which the teeth of the traverse gear engage with the teeth in the turret ring-gear or rimcog. {Visual clue: stand a bread and butter plate on edge, with a Thermos behind it on the right, so that the Thermos is about one-third occluded by the plate.}
I can not with accuracy tell you the diameters of the gearwheels used in turning the turret, though I seem to recall 6.5 inches was the diameter of the main cog engaged with the hand-crank. The housing was, iIrc, somewhat similar in shape to that surrounding the handcrank on a household butterchurn or heavy mincer; ie: cog coverered by a full disc forged to cover the housing. The crank in one model (of turret turning gear) was offset, in the other was centermounted in the housing. In either case, the gearing could be disengaged by using a lever which threw the turret-turn-cog out of engagement with the turret rimcog. This left the turret able to be traversed by hand, though the turret was necessarily weighty, and took a fair amount of effort to traverse by hand: usually requiring more than one man to do so in that mode.
The ratios in each model varied, but seem to have been most commonly 6-to-1 and 9-to-1. Though some sources say 12:1 and 16:1 cogs were produced and used.
I have found very scant evidence in support of this, however. Basically, one turn of the crank through 360Deg would turn the turret through 6 teeth on the rimcog/turret ring-gear.
There are two locations for the turret traverse gearing housing.
One, is at approximately the "3 o'clock" position when looking along the length of the vehicle from the rear. This would put the housing above and behind the driver's right shoulder, as it were. (RR Armoured cars being right-hand drive.)
The other location is at the "5 o'clock" position, which would put the housing behind the machinegunner's right hip.
Why there, I know not, as it seems a most awkward position in which to locate such a crucial component, but that kind of thinking seems to be peculiarly British.
I'm very glad the info I gave was of help to you Jim, for I am greatly enjoying seeing your fine work come to fruition.
Zathros my friend, the RR Armoured Cars have always fascinated me greatly, and this thread on that topic is one I have been enjoying.
Kind and Respectful Regards Jim and Zathros my friends, Uyraell.
Uyraell,
Another big Thanks, this project will have an interior and a motor like most of my "impressions", and thanks to you I think I have everything covered.
Jim
Another big Thanks, this project will have an interior and a motor like most of my "impressions", and thanks to you I think I have everything covered.
Jim
Jim, you are more than welcome.
I am very glad indeed to have been able to be of some help with the info I've given.
It is rare I get the chance to be able to contribute to a project, and to see your very fine work achieve fruition is a thing that occasions warmth and happiness in me.
I enjoyed seeing your photos on Flickr and have equally enjoyed your exceptional work here.
That in some small way I have helped is a genteel reward for those kindnesses others have shown me.
I wish you every success, because I admire what you are achieving in your models, and the skilled craftmanship they show.
If more comes to mind, I'll add it.
The only other relevant internal debate I have currently regarding details is the placement of the ammunition racks for the MG 30.03 ball-round boxes. In some models these racks were fixed, in others, collapsible, and in yet others, a mixture of both, generally fixed lower-most at Floor level, and collapsible either first or second level above that, where fitted.
They were either side of the turret, so to speak, but the exact placements vary with production batch and UK or India Pattern. Thus my internal debate, because I'm at a loss as to which to recommend, and I have no wish to influence you in error.
Having thought of ammo stowage, one other thought occurs.
Were you intending to model the Vickers MG and mount, there is a generally overlooked small fitting on the fixed lower right plate of the elevation quadrant of the mounting.
This fitting is a small L-pin/bar, passing through two ellipsoid but solid plate U's,about 3/4 of the fixed plate's height if measured bottom to top. the hole being close-on the diameter of the L-pin which is itself attached to the top of the fitting by a very small chain welded on. Between the two ellisoid U's is a tube with an internal diameter the same as the other holes the L-pin passes through, short bar of L being topmost.
This device was part of the elevation quadrant of the MG mount, and when the L-pin was removed, would allow the MG to be either depressed or elevated to almost the full available height of the gun slot. It's purpose was to allow engagement of "high-angle" targets such as aircraft or rooftop snipers in an emergency, but to otherwise restrict the MG elevation to the usual 20 or so degrees barrel-muzzle up and seven or nine degrees barrel-muzzle down. It is a small but significant item, but one often overlooked.
I hope the info is of sufficient relevance to be useful to you.
Kind and Respectful Regards Jim, your friend Uyraell..
I am very glad indeed to have been able to be of some help with the info I've given.
It is rare I get the chance to be able to contribute to a project, and to see your very fine work achieve fruition is a thing that occasions warmth and happiness in me.
I enjoyed seeing your photos on Flickr and have equally enjoyed your exceptional work here.
That in some small way I have helped is a genteel reward for those kindnesses others have shown me.
I wish you every success, because I admire what you are achieving in your models, and the skilled craftmanship they show.
If more comes to mind, I'll add it.
The only other relevant internal debate I have currently regarding details is the placement of the ammunition racks for the MG 30.03 ball-round boxes. In some models these racks were fixed, in others, collapsible, and in yet others, a mixture of both, generally fixed lower-most at Floor level, and collapsible either first or second level above that, where fitted.
They were either side of the turret, so to speak, but the exact placements vary with production batch and UK or India Pattern. Thus my internal debate, because I'm at a loss as to which to recommend, and I have no wish to influence you in error.
Having thought of ammo stowage, one other thought occurs.
Were you intending to model the Vickers MG and mount, there is a generally overlooked small fitting on the fixed lower right plate of the elevation quadrant of the mounting.
This fitting is a small L-pin/bar, passing through two ellipsoid but solid plate U's,about 3/4 of the fixed plate's height if measured bottom to top. the hole being close-on the diameter of the L-pin which is itself attached to the top of the fitting by a very small chain welded on. Between the two ellisoid U's is a tube with an internal diameter the same as the other holes the L-pin passes through, short bar of L being topmost.
This device was part of the elevation quadrant of the MG mount, and when the L-pin was removed, would allow the MG to be either depressed or elevated to almost the full available height of the gun slot. It's purpose was to allow engagement of "high-angle" targets such as aircraft or rooftop snipers in an emergency, but to otherwise restrict the MG elevation to the usual 20 or so degrees barrel-muzzle up and seven or nine degrees barrel-muzzle down. It is a small but significant item, but one often overlooked.
I hope the info is of sufficient relevance to be useful to you.
Kind and Respectful Regards Jim, your friend Uyraell..
Thank you, I did four decades in Silicon Valley, mostly as a prototype fabricator. You have probably heard the rumer , when you retire find something you like to do and you might make some extra money.
This year we start going to car shows and see what happens. There is more here. http://www.flickr.com/photos/closing_rivets_up/
Jim
Z
Zathros
Jim, I hope you keep hanging around here. Feel free to post pictures of anything you make. It's a privilege to have an artist such as yourself here.
Motorcycles
Ok here's a few. The first one is a Harley 1914 Board track racer. No brakes, single speed and no exhaust tubes. this was my first motorcycle project.
The second is a 1915 Harley used by the Army to chase bandits in the South West.
I'll post more later this week.
Jim
Ok here's a few. The first one is a Harley 1914 Board track racer. No brakes, single speed and no exhaust tubes. this was my first motorcycle project.
The second is a 1915 Harley used by the Army to chase bandits in the South West.
I'll post more later this week.
Jim
Attachments
Z
Zathros
Incredible! Check out Alang's post today, to see a very similar Harley, in paper!
http://www.zealot.com/forum/showthread.php?t=171841
http://www.zealot.com/forum/showthread.php?t=171841
- Status