Hi Doug, Thanks. Yes, there was a trim tab. To avoid your enjoyment of future epistles, all will be revealed in the fullness of time The motor control circuit is also something I am thinking about. For my current test program am going to use a simple 1 control - 1 motor. Do not know of the name Tasmanian Devil, the guy who has been very helpful is called Michael. You are probably right, think it could be "overmotored", but that will be revealed in the tests. Rowen
Just to clarify. Shipping was only 7 days to Canada, manufacture slightly longer. Examined the hull closely and was pleased. It is dimensionally accurate and robust, but light. It had also been reinforced in strategic areas and trimmed to the correct deck line. My many questions to Christian Sheppard – Capurro of MTBHulls were quickly and knowledgeably answered. A company I would recommend others. Reviewing the build blogs and U Tube videos of the both the Brave and Perkasa models, shows most use either single or twin screws. The original vessel had a triple screw contra - rotating layout. Experience from others suggests the third screw just adds weight and complexity, but little to the performance. Nevertheless, it was how the Braves were built, so that was how it would be. Christian gave several suggestions for other modelers who have built this vessel. Contacted them and was readily provided with information and advice. The finished weight of this model is important and a target of around 6 lbs recommended for a 1:32 scale version. This is to achieve the potential performance. Plans for drivetrain are 3 x 2835 4500kVa brushless motors, direct driving 3 x scale 3 blade 30mm screws. Decided use a single Li-Po battery for the best performance with minimum weight. It was suggested three batteries, each powering a single motor would be the best layout. After some research, concluded this would introduce a weight penalty and was discounted. There are various ideas for the best drivetrain. Unfortunately none for triple screws. Decided the best approach would be to fit the bare hull out as planned, then try it. Leaving all the finishing features for later. A contact in Australia had already done this using a single screw layout and kindly sent pictures of his hull layout and then under test. Very informative. The positions of the rudders, propellers and shafts are established by the scale dimensions and were permanently installed. Everything else was to be temporarily fitted, so it could be moved or replaced if necessary.
My only experience of a vacuum formed hull was a slightly smaller Tyne class lifeboat. Was satisfied with it, but glass fibre seems more robust, stiffer and stronger. Imagine a Vac formed hull will need full size stiffening bulkheads, which can be avoided with the GF version. Weight is very much a concern on this model and whilst Vac formed is probably lighter, this advantage may be offset by the additional structure.
Thanks Doug, Couple of pictures there I have not seen before, will be useful later in the build. Built the Damen 4207 as operated by HM Customs. Turned out well. Good cheese and beer, always enjoyed the Netherlands.
Thinking of a future project and decided upon another launch type vessel. My earlier Daman 4207 project gave an interesting model with good performance. The Brave class of FPBs (Fast Patrol Boats) caught my attention. Can remember the incredible performance they offered when entering service. Only two of the class were used by the RN, although variants were used by other navies. Have decided to use proprietary Glass fibre hulls in future as they probably cost little more than building from scratch using wood and resin. They give a robust and watertight hull, but one which still requires thought to complete properly. There are several companies that offer a “Perkasa” hull, a Brave class derivative with an almost identical hull. From previous experience have decided to limit my models to 40” long, larger vessels become difficult to transport and handle. After much research considered the hull offered by MTB Hulls in Gibraltar met my requirements best. The inquiry to MTBHulls was well handled; the quotation acceptable, so placed an order. Was pleasantly surprised at the shipping costs. From the UK these often approach the cost of the hull, but from Gibraltar they are much more reasonable. Delivery only took 7 days.
Traditionally, when powering a Rx from more than one source, such as using a BEC circuit and a separate Rx supply battery, the positive power feed from the ESC is disconnected. This avoids the double power feed. I am embarking on a triple hand screw model with 3 x ESCs so each screw can then be controlled individually from the Rx. In this situation, where all the Rx power will come from ESCs running off the same main battery (using the BECC), with no separate Rx battery supply, is it necessary to cut all the positive ESC supply leads except 1? Appreciate any advice. Thanks Rowen
Thanks all for the words of encouragement and the leg pulling. I have no idea what happened. The pictures on my I Phone camera are all the right way up, I was not drinking or smoking anything and cannot be in the Antipodes as temperatures are still below freezing. Pity the thumbnail picture when uploaded was not bigger, might has spotted the error then. Anyway, Me Culpa!
The vessel is virtually compete, just a few finishing touches such as decals and top masts. Building the deck equipment did not present any unexpected challenges and everything progressed quite quickly. Much assisted by an unusually cold Canadian winter – where is Global warming when you want it? The only comment is that this ship has a lot of deck railings, even with a simple jig these are time consuming. Am hoping to try the first on water ballast check in about ten days, A review of similar models and weights suggests something like about 4 lbs will be needed.
Hi, would prefer to see something like a stainless or brass washer. The nylon might pick up and tear, then metal to metal contact would occur. The washer has to take both the propeller thrust and rotation, so needs to be quite robust. I doubt thin nylon would last very long, it could also heat up and extrude under load. Rowen
Funnily enough, was talking about this issue earlier with other scale modelers. I faithfully reproduce the rudder position and size and then propeller shaft protrusion on my scale models. Often find when the shaft and propeller are installed they either contact or come very close to the rudder leading edge. Suspect model propellers and the boss are thicker than a scale propellers. Have resorted to trimming either the rudder or the prop boss to get them in properly. Also, have several times left the prop. locknut off and Loctited the prop to the shaft. Be interested in other's experiences. Have never lost a prop by using Loctite fortunately.
Think it was a great deal. Cannot buy the hull for anywhere near 50 GBP! I built one under a blog HMS BULLDOG / BEAGLE a couple of years ago. Turned into a nice model and very nice sailer. Only downside is she is bigger that fits my car easily and susceptible to transport damage. Good luck. As Dave M suggests, write a blog so we can watch the rebuild, it should be interesting.
Most of the deck equipment such as winches and bollards, is standard freighter fare. The deck layout is typical of a vessel of this type and vintage, as are the masts and rigging. There will be little of interest to report until the first water test is planned in about 6 weeks when will get access to an indoor pool.Will hold any further blog updates until then unless something unusual occurs .
My father built me one too. It had 2 x flat batteries and a “Mighty Midget” motor. It was well loved and suffered accordingly. Brought it to Canada and did a refurbishment. Retained original shaft and prop but with a small motor. Fitted MTRONIKS 10 with a mini rudder servo. Now sails well and passed to my Grandson for him to enjoy.
MTB by RHBaker Fleet Admiral! Posted: 3 months ago
Hi Doug, Hate to split hairs, but am researching a Brave Borderer for my next project. In doing so can advise that although the BB and the Brave Swordsman were sister ships, they had different superstructures. Have no idea why. The Perkasa was different again, it resembles the BB but it has an enclosed wheel house in front of what looks like a BB superstructure. This extended portion can be seen on the pictures. Sorry, as R.A.F in Canada, to disagree with you! Enjoyed the rest of your post though, it helped explain some of the export derivatives of the Brave class which I could not otherwise pin down. Rowen
Before the funnel could be installed wanted to fit a working radar scanner, navigation lights and the batteries. Decided to use sub C NIMH batteries in plastic holders, they should have the target endurance and provide some ballast. Fitted two sets of 4 cells, one at the forward end of the superstructure and the other at the rear, both at keel level. These were inserted into wooden battery trays to hold them in place. A dry test run showed a full speed motor run time well exceeding the hour target, so will try on water. Also took the opportunity to fit the Rx and then adjust the rudder before finishing off the wiring. Both the navigation lights (LEDs) and the radar scanner work. The radar is driven by a servo with the potentiometer removed and a magnetic drive shaft run up through the superstructure from below the deck. The motor requires about 9 volts to run at what would seem to be something approximating to scale speed; fitted a voltage reducer to allow the lights and the radar to work on less than 6 volts. The mast lights are to be installed in a separate circuit after the masts are added. As I get more into the detail it is evident the GA drawing and the photographs of the vessel in service differ. Fortunately the component locations seem consistent, although the equipment is not. This most apparent in the hold ventilators. The GA shows the standard cowl vents, but the photographs show a mixture between an vertically squeezed oval vent (which am advised is more typically German) and ventilator columns with cylindrical caps. The column style vents with cylindrical caps were easily made from two different sizes of styrene tube with the cap tops made from styrene offcuts. The squeezed oval style vents were more difficult. Broke them down into the major parts of the cylindrical vertical tube and, from a larger tube cut a small ring and filed one end to straddle the tube once it had been squeezed oval. Glued it into place whilst restrained in a small hand vice. Once set, removed and sanded the the two to give a smooth transition, closing the rear aperture off with styrene offcuts. Then resorted to wood filler, filed down to give a smooth, oval vent.
Have moved on to the deck furniture and equipment, including the funnel. Most of it can be made from the usual assortment of scrap materials and odd and ends. Decided to start on the funnel. Planned to make up a wooden replica and wrap a thin styrene sheet around it, finally inserting styrene formers into the shell, gluing them into place. Made the replica up from scrap wood blocks and shaped it into the correct shape. The outcome looked so good was tempted to use as final as making funnels seems quite a challenge. Anyway proceeded to plan and shape thin styrene sheet around the replica, using a heat gun to overcome the memory. Once this was done, fitted shaped styrene internal formers to hold the styrene to the correct shape and glued with adhesive. After the styrene glue had dried and the excess material trimmed, now had two usable funnels - wood and styrene. The wood version is nominally smaller and fits slightly better, so decided to use it. The Teakwood was originally operated by the J I Jacobs Company, which had a buff funnel with a black cap as markings. Stumbled across a picture of the vessel when she was chartered to the British India Steam Navigation Co. Evidently BI usually painted chartered vessels in their livery. Although the picture does not show the traditional and attractive BISNCo white hull cheat line, it does show the funnel markings. These are black with two narrowly separated white bands. Rather preferred this scheme so adopted it. The picture was taken in the mid 1960s and it also shows a pristine looking ship, my worries about the model looking unsoiled seem groundless. One of the pictures shows a strip that extends back from the wheelhouse almost to the funnel - this is a support for the awnings that fit over the bridge wings.
The wheelhouse was made out of styrene sheet, suitably shaped and heated to get the correct contours. It was left loose as, until the funnel is made, in some doubt about the shape and size of the cut-out needed in the navigation deck. The structure is essentially complete; glazed and painted. Until the funnel research is finished have now moved on to other items. Started making the hatch covers to establish interior hull access and to confirm the best battery that can be inserted through them. Not made a final decision on the battery size or type yet. Hatch access is limited, so gell cells are out. Vacillating between Ni-Mh and Li-Po, but have had better experience with Li-Po. The hatches are the McGregor folding type, but the GA has few details of them. Fortunately my SD 14 plans have full dimensions so copied those. On the SD 14 made the hatch coamings (sides) as males and fitted them through apertures in the deck. On Teakwood decided to build up a small wood coaming around the hatch aperture and then have the hatch coamings fit, slightly loosely (female) over them. This is a much better approach. All the coamings can now be made from the same strip so the hatches immediately stand equally above the deck. Also, shims can be inserted into the hatch coamings so the alignment can be adjusted to get them to line up accurately. It will be a better way to keep water out, although cannot see that ever being much of an issue. Added the accommodation ladder recesses in the bulwarks. In future, must remember to add them before the hull is finished as repairing damage should not be needed with better planning. Happy Christmas and Best Wishes for 2018
Hans, cannot say for the Netherlands, but in UK we try the National Martime Museum, the various local museums close to ports, shipbuilders and even local model boat clubs. There must be something similar in the Netherlands. I know there is an excellent museum in Amsterdam. The net should reveal sites and contact details Rowen
Having corrected the bow problem, returned to the superstructure. The original plan was to try to reproduce the whole of the superstructure, right back to the rear of # 5 hold in one continuous piece of styrene. It would be cut and then filed out to fit the front panel right through to the rear on both sides. This would avoid any joints and discontinuities and it was hoped would capture the flowing lines more accurately. Measured and found the piece would be over 42'' long! Decided this would be difficult to cut accurately and would probably never fit. Gave up on the idea and made the piece up in three sections; the front and both sides. The sides would be from an assembly of styrene strips and various precut shapes, the front from one styrene piece. After making several measurements and then templates, made a complete front panel from a cereal packet and from it cut the proposed panel out. Left the solid areas oversize so could file and sand to the correct size and shape. Once was reasonably confident the panel would fit, heated and bent the corners around a steel rod to get the correct radius. Throughout this kept offering the panel up into place making sure the radius and dimensional adjustments were satisfactory. Finally glued it into place. Once glued in place, cut the lower edges to follow the hull bulwark contour. Used a similar technique for the sides and finally glued them into place and together. Sanded to remove traces of adhesive. Fitted LED navigation and wheelhouse lights, but left the wheelhouse structure off as the funnel size and shape will determine the navigation deck cut-out. This will be added after the funnel has been researched and made.
Doug, Thanks for the encouragement. Was contemplating not saying anything, so readers got the impression my skills were perfect! On second thoughts though, felt that the major objective of this site is to help and encourage modelers. Thus decided better to describe the undesirable feature and then show it could be resolved. Rowen
As the superstructure rose in height it confirmed a suspicion that had been growing for some time. In spite of the copious checks during construction, the leading edge of the bow was twisted slightly by about 3/32” towards starboard at it's base. Not sure how this developed, can only guess there was a slight misalignment during the original modifications that eventually grew to become clearly visible. It was the kind of defect only discernible to a careful observer - or me! Initially hoped to avoid corrective action, but the superstructure build seemed to emphasis the twist. The model is now looking quite good; it would be a pity to compromise it with an elementary, but fundamental, issue such as this. After many measurements, including using spirit levels and squares, decided to cut the trusty bow coat hangar loose, reposition it carefully laterally and then epoxy into place. The longitudinal shape was fine. The pictures show the twist, the cut and then the amount of reposition required. Reconstruction followed the original bow addition procedure. There was a lot of sanding required on the starboard side of the bow to realign the bow and hull transition. Fortunately, this was limited to the addition area, so neither the mechanical nor water sealed qualities of the original Velarde hull have been compromised. After repainting and finishing, all looked well, as shown in the final picture. Concluded this repair was indeed worth the effort. The problem would have been exaggerated in my mind to spoil my enjoyment and then pride in the model. Glass fibre is remarkably forgiving and there should be no reluctance to embark on such modifications when necessary.
Finished the major parts of the hull and am satisfied with the results. Now turned to the superstructure, which has turned into a challenge in its own right. Decided to break the structure down into decks and concentrate on each deck individually; before “rolling them up” into the complete structure. Also decided to make the central “core” first and complete, before adding the curved frontispiece containing the forward bulwarks. This would allow all the detail between the two such as windows, doors and portholes to be accurately made and positioned. The structure from the first deck upwards was made removable to gain access to the internal systems of this working model. The lovely flowing curves, which attracted me to the vessel initially, proved a pain to reproduce. The bends around the front corners required making each deck front separately and then gently bending heated styrene around a former to reproduce. There is much opportunity for hurling! Added a L shaped strip around the front of each deck, so there is something firm to glue the front bulwarks to. Was concerned that without something like that the individual deck shields would never line up properly. Similarly added styrene U channel along the deck edges to give a surface to which the shield side rails could be fitted. This also replicates the vertical deck edge panels that are evident in pictures. Felt this would also make the structure more robust, enabling it to be removed and refitted without damage.
Started to add the finishing touches to the hull; portholes, a bulwark capping strip and bilge keels. The portholes were drilled to the outside diameter on the drawing and small sections of styrene tube epoxied in. These were then drilled out and smoothed to the hull contour. Once the hull is painted lenses will be added usimg clear epoxy. The bulwark capping strip is a small styrene “U” section CA glued along the top of the bulwarks. This tidies up the edge and gives a smooth, consistent appearance. Have never been satisfied with previous attempts at bilge keels. Tried making them from both styrene and wood, pinned and epoxied into place. Not very robust, although they looked fine. Plenty of scope for repairs! Decided to try another approach on this model. Purchased strips of 1/4” L shaped styrene and CA glued them into position on the underside of the hull, with the leg facing in towards the keel. Filled the gaps on both sides of the styrene with fibre-glass resin and then rubbed them down, feathering the edges of the bilge keel into the hull. These bilge keels are nice and strong and, from the outside, the bodge is not visible. It can been just seen from the underside if the model ever gets inverted. Hope that is unlikely though! From here on the construction will follow well established principles, so will only write bog updates as significant milestones are achieved.