|||
Not Registered
Go AD FREE & get your membership medal
BRONZE
Less Ads
SILVER
GOLD
Ad Free
Cancel
Anytime
ยฃ2.50
ยฃ4.50
ยฃ6.50
Subscribe
Go AD FREE & get your membership medal
BRONZE
Less Ads
SILVER
GOLD
Ad Free
For A Whole Year!
ยฃ25
ยฃ45
ยฃ65
Donate
You Will Be Helping Towards:

  • Domain Fees
  • Security Certificates
  • iOS & Android App Fees
  • Website Hosting
  • Fast Servers
  • Data Backups
  • Upkeep & Maintenance
  • Administration Costs

    Without your support the website wouldn't be what it is today.

    Please consider donating towards these fees to help keep us afloat.

    Read more

    All donations are securely managed through PayPal.

    Many thanks for your kind support
  • Join Us On Social Media!
    Download The App!

    Login To
    Remove Ads
    Login To
    Remove Ads

    Model Boats Website
    Model Boats Website
    Home
    Forum
    Build Blogs
    Media Gallery
    Boat Clubs & Lakes
    Events
    Boat Harbour
    How-To Articles
    Plans & Docs
    Useful Links
    The Games Chest
    Registered
    17th Sep 2023
    Last Online
    12th Feb 2025
    AlessandroSPQR
    Member Stats
    Stats
    Member No.#8123
    Registered๐Ÿ“…17th Sep 2023
    Last Online๐Ÿ“…12th Feb 2025
    City๐Ÿ“Rome
    Country๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡นItaly
    Genderโ™‚๏ธMale
    Age๐Ÿ‘ถNot Provided
    Posts๐Ÿ’ฌ1516
    Followers๐Ÿ“ฃ9
    Likes Received๐Ÿ‘4910

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Send Private Message
    ๐Ÿ’ต Gift a Membership
    Members Following
    Follow AlessandroSPQR
    ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง DuncanP ( Lieutenant)
    ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ PemyslJ ( Leading Seaman)
    ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ DWBrinkman ( Captain)
    ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Fred ( Commander)
    ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ River Rat ( Captain)
    ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Wolle ( Captain)
    ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Ronald ( Fleet Admiral)
    ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Doogle ( Rear Admiral)
    ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Mike Stoney ( Commodore)
    9 Followers
    Recent Activity
    Liked THUNDER progress 9 hours ago
    Vice Admiral
    Ranks Points
    Fleet Admiral 10,000
    Admiral 8,000
    Vice Admiral 6,000
    Rear Admiral 5,000
    Commodore 4,000
    Captain 3,000
    Commander 2,500
    Lieutenant Commander 2,000
    Lieutenant 1,600
    Sub-Lieutenant 1,200
    Midshipman 900
    Warrant Officer 600
    Chief Petty Officer 1st Class 450
    Chief Petty Officer 2nd Class 300
    Petty Officer 1st Class 200
    Petty Officer 2nd Class 150
    Master Seaman 100
    Leading Seaman 50
    Able Seaman 20
    Recruit 0
    70 Points Away From Admiral!
    Points
    ActivityWorthAwarded
    ๐Ÿ‘ Likes (rcv'd)14,910
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Forum21,982
    โœ๏ธ Comments21,020
    โœ๏ธ Blog40
    ๐Ÿ“ท Photos40
    ๐ŸŽฅ Videos100
    ๐Ÿ“ Place80
    ๐Ÿšค Harbour88
    ๐Ÿ“ Guestbook100
    ๐Ÿ˜Š Avatar1010
    7,930 Total Points
    Italy
    Signature
    This user has not added a signature
    Members Harbour
    Recent Posts
    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    8 hours ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 7 Views ยท 0 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Re: 19
    Sailing 1:1 is better.

    Login To
    Remove Ads

    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    23 hours ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 17 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    I don't think it's even necessary to flip it underwater. It seems a bit exaggerated to me.
    The wind can bend the ship to a certain point then it loses power on the sails because it blows away if they are very inclined.
    Only giant waves would make it flip but I don't think you'll sail your models in the open sea in a storm.
    Now that I think about it, an Italian modeler sailed his model on the sea (not in a storm though) from Sardinia to Liguria, a real feat. There's also the video.

    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    1 day ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 22 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Ron, I agree with you.
    You wrote: ". I don't like sailing my sailboats where the rail is submerged."
    I also don't like this condition, I think many don't like it.
    If water gets on the deck, it can enter the hold and then the stability and flotation of the model are unsafe.
    However, it is better to prepare a naval model for the worst but avoid adverse weather conditions.

    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    2 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 25 Views ยท 5 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi RossM, regarding your question I read Toradog and Roycv's answer (even though the latter wrote in another topic, Ron's: "Making an Emma Jr.").
    Roy's suggestion is very very interesting, I really appreciated it.
    You know that I don't disdain calculations (at least those I can do) and I like to know the theory (as far as I can get), yet this time I completely support Toradog who wrote: "If I lean my model over to say 60 degrees and let go and it returns to upright... it is stable. If it does not and goes the other way(the all the way over), I need waders".
    Let me explain my point: Roy was very good and gave you at least a starting point, very valuable. However, I would skip the wind part directly.
    Start from this: whether it is the wind or a demiurge or an unknown force, whatever it is makes you tilt (transversely) the ship.
    If this happens, is the model able to return to position, will it do so suddenly or very slowly? You need to work on this.
    Toradog says 60 degrees (which in real ships would be an excellent result), I say tilt it to 90 degrees or almost. Make the mast almost touch the surface of the water (after having closed the deck well and waterproofed everything perfectly).
    If it returns quickly to position then you can rest assured in my opinion.
    As I was saying for a naval model you can obtain weight stability (or get very close to it) that is, obtain that the G: Center of gravity is below the B or CB: Center of Buoyancy.
    With a bulbous fin you can do it relatively easily.
    I did this test (I don't know if you remember it), I'll put the link at the end of the text.

    I repeat, Roy has given you an excellent starting point on which to do your tests.
    As I already told you (but you know better than me): By lengthening the fin you can decrease the weight at the end of it or the total weight of the fin.
    If you want a low draft you have to increase the weight of the bulb within certain limits (you must not exceed the pre-established buoyancy line).
    Sorry if I repeated myself.

    I feel like giving you two pieces of advice even if you don't need them because you know things better than me.
    Do the righting test with wet sails and complete setup (batteries, electronics, anchor etc. etc.)
    When you finally decide on the ideal length of the fin and weight of the bulb for you, always leave a certain margin, do not reach the waterline. Half a centimeter or a centimeter. A greater freeboard is always useful. Or it could come in handy.


    Speaking of these videos, in the first one I did not bring the mast up to the surface of the water because the hull was not closed.
    In the second video I didn't bring the mast to the surface of the water because the hull wasn't well waterproofed yet and because the edge of the bathtub prevented me from doing so.
    It was an intermediate test because the model wasn't finished yet and the sails were dry.


    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    2 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 26 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi JockScott, thanks also for your contribution of experience. I love to listen or read first-hand accounts, from those who have seen and experienced firsthand.

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Re: NEW GLASS ON FOAM CATAMARAN PROJECT
    2 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 15 Views ยท 3 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Add Comment
    Great result!
    I also liked the Youtube video.

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Re: The Aztec Construction begins
    2 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 8 Views ยท 0 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Add Comment
    Very professional!

    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 40 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Toradog, thank you for your intervention and your invaluable contribution of experience, I really appreciate it very much.
    You're absolutely right.
    I hope for more contributions like yours on this topic.

    I also imagine the effort of naval engineers who have to ensure the stability of modern warships such as frigates, when they have to place naval guns. For a certain period (after the Second World War) someone hypothesized the possibility of completely giving up cannons in favor of missiles. They immediately retraced their steps, considering the cannon still an irreplaceable weapon (despite the presence of more sophisticated systems).
    Of course today they do not exceed a certain caliber ( I don't think more than 127 mm ) and are multi-role and much more compact but certainly still very heavy.
    Sorry for the digression.

    Thank you very much for your appreciation.

    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 41 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Anyway Ross, the more I look at your splendid model the more I am convinced that you could have achieved good transverse stability even without a fin under the keel.
    By replacing part of the keel with metal or heavy alloy you would have lowered the center of gravity sufficiently (enough to obtain a good righting thrust up to a good heel angle).
    The Bluenoose has a very wide and deep keel.

    Please note, this is not a suggestion but only a consideration, an observation (in a certain way perhaps a bet).

    You are right to use the fin because it is the method you had in mind from the beginning, because it is a practical method, because it is a method that guarantees the result.
    You actually have a very high and extensive sail surface, so it's better not to take risks.

    Also at this point in the project you would have to create openings and breaks that are too risky for the structure of the Bluenoose, so continue with the idea of โ€‹โ€‹the fin under the hull.

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Re: A bit more progress
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 11 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Add Comment
    It's coming out well, I like it.

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Re: Billings St Canute
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 27 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Add Comment
    Hi Davis, I use a slat bender.

    It's awesome.

    Advantages:
    Easy to use.
    Inexpensive.
    Not dangerous.
    Does not require electricity.
    Get the radius of curvature you want.

    Disadvantages:
    It leaves notch marks on one side of the strips (very unsightly).
    If this side is not visible then there is no problem.

    Login To
    Remove Ads

    ๐Ÿ“ Calypso
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 58 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    I wonder if I only saw the text because you added the photos later, or did I only see the text because I'm going stupid?
    I think the second one, ahahahahahah.

    Anyway, I repeat, a big round of applause to Doug and his spirit of observation and research.

    ๐Ÿ“ Calypso
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 61 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Amazing Doug, your eye never fails.
    Well done I admire you.

    ๐Ÿ“ Transverse stability of ships (difference between shape stability and weight stability)
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 44 Views ยท 6 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Ross, greetings to all modelers.
    I took this topic from a discussion born on Ron's Build Blog (first link at the end of the text).

    You did well to clarify the use of the correct term and the translation. Thank you.
    I always have the doubt that the terms I use are incorrect and misleading, especially the technical ones.

    I am addressing Ross, because I am answering a question of his but the discussion involves everyone, no one excluded.

    Since we have invaded Ron's "build blog", I am reporting my last message here, otherwise the meaning of what I say cannot be understood.

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""...However, in this regard I want to clarify something that many people are confused about. Let's say they don't have clear ideas.
    In scale naval models we can more or less easily obtain a "weight stability" (in Italian manuals this term is used when the center of gravity is below the center of the hull).
    In reality (with a few exceptions) almost all ships and boats (passenger ships, ferries, motorboats, oil tankers, ocean liners, cruisers, aircraft carriers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, auxiliary ships, icebreakers, container ships, but also ancient galleons and vessels, as well as naos, caravels, carracks, triremes, liburmes, etc. etc.) only had "stability of form" (in Italian manuals this term is used when the center of gravity is above the center of the hull).
    It follows that the righting thrust exists when the metacentric height is positive. In other words, the ship is able to right itself only within a certain angle of heel, not beyond.
    Ships with "stability of form" beyond a certain angle will no longer be able to right themselves and will capsize.
    Most ships, even in adverse weather conditions, do not suffer dangerous inclinations (except for a few cases in where tragedies occur)..."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    and that was Ross's question [A useful question for everyone]:

    """""""""""""""""""You used the term
    CENTRE OF THE HULL
    Possibly lost in translation, does this refer to
    CENTRE OF BUOYANCY OF THE HULL?
    It is best ABOVE the centre of gravity.
    CENTRE OF BUOYANCY will shift as the hull heels over.
    Does centre of hull and centre of buoyancy refer to the same thing?"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    =============================================

    Yes Ross I was imprecise, I double-checked the terminology in English.
    Fortunately the capital letters indicate the same terms in both English and Italian.

    So, to avoid misunderstandings:

    G: Center of gravity (in Italian "centro di gravitร " or "baricentro" is the point where the weight force acts).

    B or CB: Center of Buoyancy. ["The center through which the buoyant force acts. The CB moves as the underwater shape changes as the hull moves up and down (or rolls sideways) in the water. If the hull is floating free to trim or roll, the CB will always be directly under the center of gravity."]

    M: Metacenter. ["the theoretical point around which the boat rolls or trims."]

    GM: Metacentric height [It is the distance between the center of gravity of a ship and its metacentre. A larger metacentric height implies greater initial stability against overturning.]


    So when I wrote "center of the hull" I meant B or CB (in Italian "centro di carena" or "centro di spinta di archimede".)

    For the rest I confirm what I have already written, if something does not convince you just tell me. In this topic we can digress calmly.

    In essence, I repeat, with very few exceptions, ships have a stability (which we in Italy call "stability of form" in my opinion in a very misleading way, but this is how it is written in all the manuals) in which G [Centre of gravity] is above B or CB [Centre of Buoyancy].
    In this condition, common to almost all ships, (see image no. 1) the position of M [Metacenter] is important.
    As long as the metacentric height is positive there will be a righting moment.
    In our scale naval models (not having the real needs of a real ship) we can obtain a stability of weight (in which G [Centre of gravity] is below B or CB [Centre of Buoyancy]).
    In this case the ship never capsizes, the righting thrust is always present with any angle of inclination (it will always return to the initial position).
    Many modelers do not know that in real ships, not only is this condition not present but the metacentric height is not excessively high so as not to create a righting moment that is too abrupt (which would create problems for the crew and passengers, for example seasickness); in Italian we would say that we would have a ship that is "too hard". So a compromise is sought even at the expense of greater transverse stability.

    If you are still not convinced, I will use your own manuals to translate the ones in Italian and illustrate the situation better.
    If you want I can go into more detail and clarify the issue of transverse stability.




    forum/147178#147766
    ๐Ÿ“ Calypso
    3 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 61 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Great Doogle, great recovery.
    It went better than I thought, good thing.
    Change that cable now.

    ๐Ÿ“ Making an Emma Jr.
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 34 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Yes, Ross is right, we invaded your topic a bit, sorry Ron.
    But by doing so your magnificent work will get more visibility.

    My intention was only to reassure Jumpugly. His model will have no problems because, as already said, it has space to spare and does not have sails.
    The sails are the big problem because they raise the center of gravity and (especially when the wind is abeam) tilt the ship to one side.

    However, in this regard I want to clarify something that many people are confused about. Let's say they don't have clear ideas.
    In scale naval models we can more or less easily obtain a "weight stability" (in Italian manuals this term is used when the center of gravity is below the center of the hull).
    In reality (with a few exceptions) almost all ships and boats (passenger ships, ferries, motorboats, oil tankers, ocean liners, cruisers, aircraft carriers, destroyers, frigates, corvettes, auxiliary ships, icebreakers, container ships, but also ancient galleons and vessels, as well as naos, caravels, carracks, triremes, liburmes, etc. etc.) only had "stability of form" (in Italian manuals this term is used when the center of gravity is above the center of the hull).
    It follows that the righting thrust exists when the metacentric height is positive. In other words, the ship is able to right itself only within a certain angle of heel, not beyond.
    Ships with "stability of form" beyond a certain angle will no longer be able to right themselves and will capsize.
    Most ships, even in adverse weather conditions, do not suffer dangerous inclinations (except for a few cases in where tragedies occur).

    Ross, regarding your fin, I am not able to establish how long it should be, calculations should be made with all the data available (almost impossible to find). It is much easier to do empirical tests.
    As you know, the longer the fin is under the keel, the less weight you need to put at the end of it.
    If you want less draft you need to increase the weight at the end of the fin or the thick fin (in case the weight is distributed and does not have the final bulb), so as to be able to shorten it.
    Logically the weight can be increased within certain limits. Until reaching the waterline.

    I completely agree with luckyduck: it is important to already place the necessary weights (not considered ballast) as low as possible (at least under the waterline).
    Since I made the project from scratch I was able to make the choices I wanted and I managed to position the relevant weights as low as possible. I am referring to the two batteries, the motor and the propeller shaft, the large electrical cables, etc. etc.
    In this way I managed to obtain a good righting thrust (I cannot say without calculations whether I obtained a "stability of form" or a "stability of weight") even without ballast.
    When I then added the 400 gram ballast (in place of the keel) I obtained a truly satisfactory righting thrust.
    All empirically.
    Doing as luckyduck says is better. Create a stable ship already without ballast (if that is possible).

    ๐Ÿ“ Lifeboats or work boats?
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 11 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi JockScott I think it's a good method for such small boats.
    Alternatively, there is the 3D printer, but I would still have to do the drawing.
    Try your method, if you are not satisfied I will try to make the drawing and send it to you in any case.

    ๐Ÿ“ Making an Emma Jr.
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 33 Views ยท 3 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Jumpugly, if you don't have a keel you're right, you can't make any substitutions.
    In that case, lead pellets are fine because they have the advantage of distributing themselves well in the desired spaces.
    You can also use single lead or brass bars placed in the appropriate points at the bottom of the hold.
    However, in your case there are no problems because the model is very large and you don't have sails. The margins of work are wide. It doesn't matter that the ballast of the pellets will have a lower efficiency (about half compared to homogeneous bars) because you have a lot of volume available (so it's not vital to optimize).
    Try to position the batteries very low (especially if they are lead).

    Thank you very much for your final words.

    ๐Ÿ“ American Scout C-2 Freighter
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 31 Views ยท 3 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    More and more beautiful!
    Jumpugly=the styrene wizard. It's a skill I would like to have too.

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Re: Aeronaut Anna 3
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 32 Views ยท 0 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Add Comment
    I love it so much, well done James!

    ๐Ÿ“ Question of the Day?
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 49 Views ยท 3 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Instead I am only at 23%, even though I have never given a wrong answer in many months. Italy is at 100% so something is wrong.
    I am saddened.
    I am joking, it is just a game. I thank Stephen for the improvement work he does. I am sure he will win in the end.

    Login To
    Remove Ads

    ๐Ÿ“ Making an Emma Jr.
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 30 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Greetings to all modelers.

    I agree with Roycv in what he wrote in message no. 26 of this topic:
    RoyCV wrote: "...The benefit of lead sheet over bb's is that there are no air spaces in between..."

    I had already highlighted that the spheres occupy about half the volume of a corresponding parallelepiped. So they are not very effective.
    In particular:
    They are less effective than a full volume if used as ballast, because (with the same metal or alloy) you get about half the weight by putting pellets instead of using a full geometric shape. The other half will be air.
    On the other hand, they are absolutely useless if used as a buoyancy reserve. This is clear because in the event of flooding the water will fill the spaces between the spheres. The weight of the water will cancel (more or less) the thrust of the spheres.

    To understand why I refer you to the message from about eight months ago in the topic entitled: "29" Double Horse 7007 Flying Fish" in response to CB90. It is the first link at the end of this message.
    Since it is a bit difficult to find (the messages of the "build blog", unlike those of the forum, do not have any numbering) I report the full text and the images below:

    """""""""""""""""""""""To guarantee a buoyancy reserve it is not essential that the spheres are glued together.
    The important thing is that, in the event of a leak in the hull (or in any case if water is entering the hold) they remain in position to carry out their task.
    To do this, they just need to be placed in a closed compartment.
    However, in the event of flooding, even if the spheres cannot leave the boat, water will seep in between them.
    Geometrically the spheres do not have a total occupation of the volume and the space between them is quite conspicuous.
    To understand this, look at the images.
    In the second and third attached images a parallelepiped measuring 36 x 24 x 24 mm is represented.
    So its total volume will be 20736 mm3.
    Let's take into consideration spheres with a radius of 3 mm (diameter 6 mm).
    A maximum of 96 spheres of this diameter can fit inside this parallelepiped.
    A sphere with a diameter of 6 mm has a volume of approximately 113.1 mm3.
    Therefore the volume occupied by all the spheres will be 10858 mm3.
    Well if you make a proportion between the volume of the parallelepiped and the total of the spheres you will realize that this is approximately 52.36%.
    Logically this proportion is always the same, whatever the number of balls taken into consideration and whatever their diameter.
    This means that if water gets between the spheres or if the glue you use is heavier or slightly lighter than the water, you will have reduced (almost halved) the floating effect of the spheres.

    In fact I prefer light material but not in spheres. Compact, square shapes that I can cut out. They will fill all the spaces (not leaving them available for water) and will be stuck together without the need for glue.
    In any case, if you still want to use the spheres, you could put them in various hermetically sealed bags.
    I don't know if I managed to explain myself well with the translation.
    I hope so.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


    =============================================

    I also have to say that I like the solution of the embedded ballast (which replaces a piece of wood of similar shape) in the keel itself.
    I also adopt this solution (as you can see in message no. 105 of the last attached link) which is a very simple trick to lower the center of gravity as much as possible without resorting to fins under the hull.
    Finding message no. In among the 439 total is a bit difficult (I have a tired finger from spinning the wheel of my mouse) so I attach some fairly explanatory photos.

    =============================================



    blogs/140953#141820
    forum/128542
    ๐Ÿ“ Dead short
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 15 Views ยท 0 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Some pictures would be very useful to help you (Seeing pictures reveals many things that words don't say), otherwise we are groping in the dark.

    ๐Ÿ“ Lifeboats or work boats?
    4 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 15 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Jock, the images aren't great and unfortunately the front view is missing (which would have given me the indication of the larger frame).
    However, without any guarantee of success and with very long times, I could try if you like.
    But there is another problem, if I haven't made a mistake in the calculations (i.e. a simple division) an eight meter long boat on its tanker means little more than 5 cm. It is very small to make it in wood with the planking method. I made 4 of them twice as long and a little more and I had quite a bit of difficulty.
    An important question: if I provided you with the drawing in two 2d would you then like to make it in wood?
    If you say yes, even just to try then I'll try to draw it too.

    ๐Ÿ“ Lifeboats or work boats?
    5 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 24 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Mike, as I already told you in your "build blog", I like your boat a lot, I think it is expertly made.
    The problem is that our boats are not suited (hull shape) to JockScott's tanker.
    If one of mine was the right shape, we would have already solved every problem because I can scale the 2d plane (keel and frames) to the desired size.

    ๐Ÿ“ Dead short
    5 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 27 Views ยท 1 Like
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Stephen, with so little information I can only make some hypotheses to try to help you.
    You could attach some photos in which you can clearly see both the wiring and the individual components (motor, esc, battery).
    I ask you this to try to verify: how the wiring is made, the state of the individual components (if they seem damaged) and their characteristics.
    If the battery voltage is 12 volts and the engine voltage is 12 volts, if the wiring is correct I can assume that the ESC is less volts (the most common ones reach 8.4 volts).
    Also for this reason I would like to see a photo.

    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Re: Port Area
    6 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 57 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ’ฌ Add Comment
    Beautiful!

    ๐Ÿ“ Lifeboats or work boats?
    6 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 31 Views ยท 3 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi Mike, I only wanted to evaluate the possibility of drawing the boats (not the entire model). Only the lifeboats. Was this clear or did I explain myself poorly?

    ๐Ÿ“ Lifeboats or work boats?
    6 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 31 Views ยท 4 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi JockScott, regarding the cut text, this is due to the fact that you inserted an internet link (copy paste of URL).
    On this site you have to do it at the end if you don't want all the written text (after the link) to be cut off.

    Sorry Jock, I misunderstood, I thought some photos might also be useful to you.
    No, unfortunately I don't have complete drawings with keel and frames.

    Could you post me the drawings you have available? Maybe top, side and front view if you have them.
    Could you give me the dimensions of the lifeboats? (length, width and height).

    I'm asking you both out of curiosity and because I want to evaluate whether I have the ability to do it myself.
    Without obligation, if you don't like it or don't have time don't worry at all.

    ๐Ÿ“ Lifeboats or work boats?
    7 days ago by ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น AlessandroSPQR ( Vice Admiral)
    โœง 32 Views ยท 2 Likes
    Flag
    ๐Ÿ“ Reply
    Hi JockScott, I started my search but I still have little in hand.
    However, in the absence of other messages I will write you something.
    Anyway, in addition to telling you what I found, I will ask you some questions to better understand your needs.

    First I started from the ship you are reproducing: the Esso Deutschand tanker.
    I tried to enlarge all the images I found on the internet but the resolution is terrible.
    I can deduce with certainty that there are only four, two for each side on the command island.

    The second question I asked myself and to which I found an answer is the following: in 1960 were there already modern lifeboats closed or semi-closed, non-tilting, free-fall?

    I can tell you with certainty that in 1960 there were open boats and not the closed and semi-closed ones (which are now seen on all ferries, cruise ships and commercial ships). On commercial ships you can also find free-fall lifeboats (if I'm not mistaken they are prohibited on passenger ships).
    In short, I believe that the shape of these lifeboats is that of the first four photos of this message (certainly not that of the photos seen in the first link or in the fifth photo).

    I came to this conclusion simply by looking at many photos of ships in books and on the internet starting from 1900 up to the 60s.
    I am not yet able to establish when the modern closed or semi-closed lifeboats were first introduced (in short, the ones we can see today).
    By refining my research I could arrive at a specific year. I am convinced that there was a certain period of time in which the transition from one type to another occurred.

    What interests us is that in 1960 there were open boats.

    With the same search criteria I was able to see that in the 60s there were also self-inflating rafts. Those white cylinders that you see on every ship (see photos no. 6 and 7).

    Now let's move on to another problem:
    how to make them.

    At this point I have to ask you: don't you even have the profile drawing of these lifeboats?
    However, with the help of the photo of the original Deutschand Esso (images 8 and 9), and with your model you should at least establish the length of these lifeboats and, perhaps, their height.

    All this to try to draw them independently, but we can find a shortcut.
    Find commercial models of your same scale (1:150) of lifeboats referring to ships that are quite contemporary.
    For example that of the Titanic 1:150. I'll leave you the link. But it doesn't seem very refined to me.



    https://www.nauticexpo.it/prod/viking/product-21603-603428.html
    https://www.rocrimodellismo.com/it/scialuppe/15346-kit-montaggio-scialuppa-titan
    https://www.mantuamodelshop.com/kit-scialuppa-titanic.html


    About This Website
    Terms of Service
    Privacy Policy