Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and expectations

Hello, and welcome to the forums at the Nautilus Drydocks, formerly Sub-driver.com!

We welcome anyone with a passion for submarines and a desire to learn and share knowledge about this fascinating hobby. Use of these forums indicates your intention to abide by our code of conduct:


1. No spam. All automated messages, advertisements, and links to competitor websites will be deleted immediately.

2. Please post in relevant sub-forums only. Messages posted in the wrong topic area will be removed and placed in the correct sub-forum by moderators.

3. Respect other users. No flaming or abusing fellow forum members. Users who continue to post inflammatory, abusive comments will be deleted from the forum after or without a warning.

4. No threats or harassment of other users will be tolerated. Any instance of threatening or harassing behavior is grounds for deletion from the forums.

5. No profanity or pornography is allowed. Posts containing adult material will be deleted.

6. No re-posting of copyrighted materials or other illegal content is allowed. Any posts containing illegal content or copyrighted materials will be deleted.
See more
See less

1/96 Project 1710 Beluga

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by bwi 971 View Post





    Free translation of a russian publication:

    quote " it was possible to determine the ways of reducing hydrodynamic interference to the work of the SAC at high speeds, as well as to test new methods for calculating propellers (at different times, propellers of different designs were installed on the submarine) " unquote

    and if we look at the below scetch it's not so unrealistic me think.

    What I don't know is if they were tandem or contra-rotating props.

    When built she was provided with a single 7 blade prop with actuator (It was not a highly skewed propellor).

    So maybe she had different props during here lifetime but when she was scraped her original (or lookalike) prop was in place, see picture below.


    Grtz,
    Bart
    Click image for larger version Name:	beluga.jpg Views:	1 Size:	66.0 KB ID:	125674



    Click image for larger version

Name:	beluga prop01.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	212.6 KB
ID:	125676
    Thanks Mate. I have several different prop designs shown on the plans that I have and also several different photographs. This all makes more sense now.

    Comment


    • So I spent most of yesterday casting up stern planes. What a mess. Each of those things is an individual casting and it took forever to get four sets of the dammed things done. Today I couldn't face going on with all that again so I decided to have a go at casting the entire rear end in one bit (like I should have done in the first place!!!)
      This nis the plug.

      Its not finished yet but everything is in line and its fits nicely on the back of the boat. Advice on the best way to cast this thing would be appreciated. My initial thoughts are to cast the internal plug first, then cast the bottom half up to the forward edge of the control surfaces, then the top half. Three pieces in all.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by HardRock View Post
        So I spent most of yesterday casting up stern planes. What a mess. Each of those things is an individual casting and it took forever to get four sets of the dammed things done. Today I couldn't face going on with all that again so I decided to have a go at casting the entire rear end in one bit (like I should have done in the first place!!!)
        This nis the plug.


        Its not finished yet but everything is in line and its fits nicely on the back of the boat. Advice on the best way to cast this thing would be appreciated. My initial thoughts are to cast the internal plug first, then cast the bottom half up to the forward edge of the control surfaces, then the top half. Three pieces in all.
        Exactly so, sir:
























        David
        Last edited by He Who Shall Not Be Named; 03-25-2018, 11:27 AM.
        "... well, that takes care of Jorgenson's theory!"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by bwi 971 View Post





          Free translation of a russian publication:

          quote " it was possible to determine the ways of reducing hydrodynamic interference to the work of the SAC at high speeds, as well as to test new methods for calculating propellers (at different times, propellers of different designs were installed on the submarine) " unquote

          and if we look at the below scetch it's not so unrealistic me think.

          What I don't know is if they were tandem or contra-rotating props.

          When built she was provided with a single 7 blade prop with actuator (It was not a highly skewed propellor).

          So maybe she had different props during here lifetime but when she was scraped her original (or lookalike) prop was in place, see picture below.


          Grtz,
          Bart
          Click image for larger version Name:	beluga.jpg Views:	1 Size:	66.0 KB ID:	125674



          Click image for larger version

Name:	beluga prop01.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	212.6 KB
ID:	125676
          Well, on that sketch we see a right hand propeller forward, and a left-hand propeller aft. Counter-rotating, not tandem turning. Net torque on the boat: zero!

          David
          "... well, that takes care of Jorgenson's theory!"

          Comment


          • Thanks. I'm on it.

            Comment


            • I just realised that the photograph didn't appear for some reason. Here it is.

              Click image for larger version

Name:	P3250232.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	447.8 KB
ID:	125733

              Comment


              • Originally posted by HardRock View Post
                I just realised that the photograph didn't appear for some reason. Here it is.
                Click image for larger version  Name:	P3250232.jpg Views:	1 Size:	447.8 KB ID:	125733
                No need for the stern control surface operating shafts to be so big in diameter. As the rudders and stern planes are protected by the fixed stabilizers, you can get away with control surface operating shafts of .062" or so.





                The bigger diameter operating shafts weaken the tips of the stabilizers.
                "... well, that takes care of Jorgenson's theory!"

                Comment


                • They are actually a bit smaller than that. 1.5 mm. Its a pretty small tail. I've made up some brass inserts to go in the stabiliser tips. They have a hole for the operating shalf and should end up fully enclosed in resin.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by HardRock View Post
                    They are actually a bit smaller than that. 1.5 mm. Its a pretty small tail. I've made up some brass inserts to go in the stabiliser tips. They have a hole for the operating shalf and should end up fully enclosed in resin.
                    Very well.

                    David
                    "... well, that takes care of Jorgenson's theory!"

                    Comment


                    • The lower mould for the tail section is drying today so I decided to get on with painting my own boat.

                      Click image for larger version

Name:	P3270236.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	468.2 KB
ID:	125744



                      Click image for larger version

Name:	P3270231.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	637.7 KB
ID:	125745


                      Click image for larger version

Name:	P3270233.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	541.3 KB
ID:	125746


                      The tail on this one won't be as good as the new, all in one job but its OK.

                      Comment


                      • This rubber mould is taking forever to dry. In the mean time I amusing myself with with an airbrush.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	P3290233.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	612.5 KB
ID:	125758


                        Click image for larger version

Name:	P3290235.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	110.9 KB
ID:	125759



                        Click image for larger version

Name:	P3290234.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	501.1 KB
ID:	125760

                        Comment


                        • The lower mould has finally set hard. Thus:

                          Meanwhile the painting goes on.

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	P3300233.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	402.9 KB
ID:	125766


                          Click image for larger version

Name:	P3300234.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	647.3 KB
ID:	125767

                          Comment


                          • You lazy ****! sand off those 3D artifacts off the control surfaces!

                            You people: I buy you books, send you to school, and what do you do? .... you eat the teacher!

                            David
                            The Horrible
                            "... well, that takes care of Jorgenson's theory!"

                            Comment


                            • Ha ha. I actually cast a full set of control surfaces to send you because I knew you'd go ape-**** over the 3D items. I usually do sand them off but I like the look of them on this model. Lots of texture.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by HardRock View Post
                                Ha ha. I actually cast a full set of control surfaces to send you because I knew you'd go ape-**** over the 3D items. I usually do sand them off but I like the look of them on this model. Lots of texture.
                                Don't hand me that crap - a turd festooned with corn has 'texture' as well. But I don't want that hanging off the ass-end of my model submarine!

                                What's wrong with you people!

                                David
                                "... well, that takes care of Jorgenson's theory!"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X