my new build , I had sworn off of pontos , after they ripped me off last time and hearing all the false promoses , on the bismarck . But I found a bloke who did a full build using this PE , so I sucked it up and got their kit , all was there this time round .
your right about the pe capnmac , their is a lot of it , he said with a shudder , the stuff on the left is out of the kit stuff .
all the frets are organised .
this is a tad on the large size .
You Know;
You just saved me a bunch of money. If the Iowa is anything like this I won’t be buying it either. For all that’s Holy, why can’t they get the Bow and Stem correct according to photos and plans. They also never include the Below the waterline Bulb, However small on any ship that has one!. Look at the Box Art. Look at the Wisconsin here at home or the Missouri in Pearl then Compare. They still ain’t got it right!
Even the Large Fletcher by Lindberg is Wrong! Wrong,and Dead Wrong!
Lindbergh got it wrong?
Shocking!
I want to say that Midwest Model Shop built this kit (can’t remember if he used Pontos), that ran to like 21 YT episodes. Was a pretty terrific build for being mostly out of the box (I don’t think his Deck Blue was ‘blue’ enough).
For perserverance with 1/200 Pontos, check out Steve at The Model Shed’s series on his 1/200 Hood. That’s up to 30 something episodes and not quite done yet.
His build just confirms (to me) that Pontos hired the guys ar Dragon who would design parts to be 5 things when they could be just one. Which confirmed my opinion of the Pontos Texas set. Sigh (Hope the new owner of that is happy.)
That bow is clearly not the shap of Kentucky’s, and is an exaggerated form of NJ’s
Like Tanker, the fact that no one appears to be able to read body plans and put the bulb on the bow is vexing. That superfine bow requires a bulb to limit pitching.
thanks for the link capn , the midwest model shop was the guy I was thinking about .he did get the full pontos kit that I got and used a fair bit of it , but I will be looking up steve , it seem’s every second name on the ship site is a steve . [8-|]
often wondered what the bulb was for , now I know .
Here’s Steve (Model Shed) link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfkPhaBJc0F6h5F1FzAM32Q
He’s going to build a 1/144 Flower after Hood is complete.
The bow bulb seems goofy until the logic is explained. With a sharp “V” taper on the bow, there’s not a lot of area above the water to resist the push down as the bow pitches forward.
As the pitch down becomes a pitch up there’s also very little there to resist that movement. (Now in plan view, we want sharpenss to cut through the water, so narrow is a requirement.)
The bulb creats a reservoir of boutancy to offset all the skinniness. Which works even when submerged (physics of liquids can be fascianting). Spped through the water is not that great an issue for the effect, either–something they did not know in 1940.
The modern fashion is to have larger torpedo-round bow bulbs. Part of that is to create a ring compression effect which tends to hold the forefoot level through the sea. There are some longer more “drop tank” shaped bulbs out there too–those are specifically to lengthen the waterline which improves the maximum possible speed in the water (there’s most of a semester on the physics of waterline length to speed rations).
thankyou capn , for the full explaination of how the bulb works . and for the link , I watched him do the 35’ admirals boat , he has some serious skills . I’ve subscribed to him as well .
I found a pic of the bulbous nose on the missouri , could you explain to me what those side fenders , sticking out of it are for please , sort of toying with the idea making my own bulb , skills permitting of course .
joined the bow section onto the hull , had to use a bit of bog , will know how good a job I did after primer .
No clue as to it’s purpose but it looks like a cradle of some kind to me.
Could those be tool buckets to raise and lower tools and such?
The side things are part of the build / launch cradle.
As for biulding your own bulbous bow, check out this shot as it shows the extend of the hull lines from the bulb on back. As you can see, it does not narrow again aft of the bow.
Looks like they cut an opening in the bulb to gain access for some reason. Note the top of the “wing”, looks like it penetrates the hull, but still open just above.
Is the Navy that paranoid about the ship moving without permmission that they drop anchor in dry dock? LOLOLOL!
Well, some ships are more motivated than others . . .
No actually, you should note that that chain is considerably smaller than the anchor chains, and is there for streaming paravanes (mine sweeping). As the paravanes swing out because of their ‘wings’ , the chain weight keeps them from pulling the cable out of the water. Without the cable in the water, you don’t catch mines, you find them when they detonate against the hull, which is not a recommended practice.
here we go , didn’t think I was much of a sculptor , this is as good as I can do . will hit it with some primer see what needs to be fixed . at least it has a bulbous nose now , still have to fix the little ring down below , that should be easy enough , get back to you soon .
You’ve got the width looking good, but there’s a bit too much toe. In profile, the bow below the waterline should be near verticle. Check out the photo of Iowa’s bow, which should be identical.
And a drawing of Missouri,
steve5, why are you doing that as that as not a New Mexico class battleship? download this link as is a set of plans for that ship. BB-63 - USS Missouri - Booklet of General Plans, 1950, Iowa Class https://maritime.org/doc/plans/bb63.pdf
I believe those are “drag wings” to slow the ship once the forefoot hits the water to keep her from skeedaddling out once off the launching ways.
The suspended bundles of chains pay out to also brake the speed built up as 881 feet of hull trundle off the ways.
Dang it. No one has published online Page 450 of the 1943 Blueacket’s Manual, which shows the skeg version. Or, Page 64 of Seamanship, NavPers 16118-B, 1953 (which has an aentire section on streaming paravanes). Very odd that the rigging does not appear in later BJM.
The Skeg exists to have a loop of chain, one on either side of the bow. There’s an eye in that chain, to which the paravane streaming line is shackled onto. The shain is used to haul the streaming wire down to the level of the skeg. The chain is then used to hoist the shackle back up to deck level for recovery. (all of this applies only to capitol ships, mine sweepers stream the stern with weasles and otters to pull the wire down to required depth).
Found this photo:
Paravane cable would be one of the things that would have been stowed in a reel on the foredeck, possibly under a canvas cover.
Oh, and I found this, too:
Once the paravanes were discontinuted (in the late 50s) the chains and bow rigging were unshipped. Only the skeg, welded to the bow remained.
thankyou for that capn , i learn a lot from you mate . I have started shaving excess milliput from the bulb , as others have suggested , i can only go so far as I put a ball to the bow , to start me off . live and learn I will be better next time .
thanks for the colour shot too , I didn’t realise how wide the boot stripe was , it will come in handy .
“Not a recommended practice”. Yeah, I can see the wisdom in that. Lol!