Tug Forum

Tug Forum => NEWBIES - START HERE ! => : Toby March 21, 2017, 04:14:41

: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 21, 2017, 04:14:41

I have now acquired some very good photos of the tug as Perseverance taken at various times. They are not easy to find or to buy and yet can obviously be found with some considerable effort. 

Then it dawned on me that if this tug is a popular model as Imara where is the photographic or drawn evidence for the details about this tug?

I have actually now seen the original plans for the tug. The tug plans are dated with the F@F shipbuilders cachet and dated later as well with a cachet for Chatham Dockyard.  The plans are clearly Imara and the name is printed large but crossed out in pencil and substituted with the name PERSEVERANCE.  There is pencil notation about the stern written by an Admiralty official. As these drawings are from the shipbuilders and supplied to the Admiralty on its purchase of the tug clearly they must be definitive as to how the ship was built and fitted out.
There are six sheets but for modellers only two of these are needed. The drawings are of 1:48 scale and very clear crisp drawings.

I took with me a reduced version of the model plan copied on to a large
 tracing  sheet so that I could overlay this on top of the original plan for ease of comparison.

The people at the archive in Woolwich are very friendly and helpful. The room was comfortable and a large desk was available as was ruler and propper weighted strips to hold plan edges. 
Viewing is available between 10-13.00 and 14 -17.00 by appointment.
Immediately in the vicinity are three very pleasant eateries and watering holes and it is an easy walk to the River.
The nearest station is Woolwich Arsenal.
From there is it an easy and short walk.

Contact details:

Jeremy Michell, MA
Historic Photographs and Ships Plans Curator & Manager, National Maritime Museum.

Copies of plans can be acquired by ordering from:

I believe the current price is £70 for the first plan required and £50 for a second different plan.

It was interesting to learn that I was the first person to request a viewing of the Imara plans, as far their records showed and memories recalled. I am amazed that no other modeller has bothered, for if they had and if no contradictory photo exists of Imara, then one has to conclude the models built have some very visual flaws which are not changes, made post purchase, by the Admiralty. Those changes under Perseverance can only be gleaned from the photographs. Clearly some of those changes thought to be changes because those aspects differ from the Imara kit are in fact not differences at all but how it was built in the first place.

...to be continued


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 21, 2017, 04:38:23
Plans details listed as Perseverance (1931).

NPN7395 Rigging and Profile, 1931 1:48
NPN7396 Profile and Decks,    1931 1:48

Other plans are:
Docking plan and sections
Shell expansion
Lines,  body 1/2 breath
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 21, 2017, 04:53:45
The Imara plan states: 109ft BP.
The plan drawing at 1:48 concurred measuring 27 1/4" from bow post to rudder post;   48scale×27.25" = full-size1308" ~ 109ft. Thus 1308" ÷32scale = 40.875" BP/ 1038.22mm BP for Imara and Perserverance 32 scale models.

Must measure my model....I have got a feeling that it may be a little short but I may be pleasantly surprised.

Details on the plan:

From DRG No 1 General arrangement NPN7396
Dredge Builders
Phoenix Way
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: 2tugboats March 21, 2017, 14:40:59
Hello Toby. . .I'm sure you must have seen this article in "Model Boats Magazine" but
if not there is mention of the builder of a kit changing things to match the real one.


Your Imara is going to be a masterpiece Toby,
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 21, 2017, 15:46:09
Hello Michael,
I don't sadly have the ability to make masterpieces. I am just average I think.  A few may say I am a closet perfectionist but getting the brain and the fingers to agree with the mind's eye is not always easy.
Thank you for kindly sending to me that article.  I have just read the article which was very interesting indeed but the model was alas not a very accurate model of Perseverance at all.  It is not an accurate Imara either basing such an opinion on the original plans of Imara seen and the photos of Perseverance in my possession.

By the way Michael, I am aiming to create a model  of Perseverance rather than Imara.

When finished I shall return to the Danube V.

I wonder if any in the forum would be interested in reading about the observations about Imara / Perseverance I have made.  I could write about things section by section of the boat. Anyone thinking of buying a new or ready built would then know what needed to be corrected.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 22, 2017, 13:10:34
I was pleasantly surprised, for, the BP measurement of the model equated quite well to the plan, measuring 1045mm, and thus only about 7mm longer than the plan.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 23, 2017, 18:07:23
Well Michael, it would seem once again that although many have looked at this topic, have, similarly to the enquiry about a database of tugs in books, chosen  not to declare any interest. No one has said that they would or would not be interested in my findings for this apparently popular or once popular tug build.  Nor has anyone said whether any one has seen a photo of the tug as Imara.

I shall mention some of my initial observations.

Although some modellers, having seen a general photograph of Perseverance, have pointed out that Perseverance only had 4 wash ports instead of the 6 associated with Imara model, my curiosity about this feature arose once I had a good photo of Perseverance to look at, for it seemed apparent that there had not been any bulwark manipulation where the two other washports had supposedly been removed.  Having now seen the Imara plan,  the reason has become evident, for rather than the six on the model boat plan,  the original drawing has only four.

SO TO CLARIFY, the tug, whether as Imara or Perseverance, ONLY EVER HAD 4 WASH PORTS,  and not 6 for Imara and 4 for Perseverance. This accounted for the reason I could not see any adaptations in the bulwarks of Perseverance.

SO 4 WASH PORTS PER SIDE ONLY and they thus also NEED TO BE REPOSITIONED.  Further these are hinged from behind and not on the face of the wash ports.

Wash ports circa 17mm x 28.5mm (1:32).  They measure about half bulwark in depth.

ALSO in the bulwarks are four oval holes per side (Panama ports? someone let me know the correct term please). THESE ARE the same for 'both tugs' and THEY NEED to be repositioned for accuracy. Also these do not have a rim on the outer face of the bulwark.

THESE STATEMENTS  are correct because the original drawings of Imara 1931 and photographs of Perseverance 1930s 1940s and 1950s show the tug  with the same number of, and positioning of, these bulwark features. 

The small opening in the stern section of the bulwark
has the plate protruding INWARDS and not outwards as seen on some models and seated on it should be a fairlead not a bollard.  Also this opening size needs to be kept narrow for there is a double row of rivets beneath and about the opening and in the case of Perseverance there needs to be enough space between the top of the opening and the capping on the bulwarks to be able to state the name Perseverance in large white capitals centrally.  THIS IS VERIFIED by a portion of video held at the Imperial War Museum LONDON of Perseverance towing HMS BIRMINGHAM on her commission at Chatham Docks.

There is not to much to state of matters below the waterline but the original plans of Imara do show it to be a TWIN SCREW vessel.  On the ORIGINAL PLANS (printed 1:48 scale) these screws measured 60mm and so at the scale of the model (1:32) the screws would be scale at 90mm! I currently have 70mm brass screws but have not decided what it is best to sail with. Perhaps 90mm screws would be both scale and fine to sail with or perhaps it has been found that 70mm screws are best for sailing. Anyhow whatever,  the plans show 90mm ought to be the size for the model.  Further concerning the prop shaft it does seem that it is a more bulky affair at its exit from the Hull, rather than just a thin stuffing tube.
Interestingly the original drawings do not show any detailed A-frame support for the end of the prop shaft. I checked all six drawings.

That completes my observations concerning the props and hull up to the bulwarks. The support brackets, on the bulwark capping, for Samson posts may have to be repositioned as well as the stern fairleads on the capping.

I hope to produce a few drawings from my notes.  I am likely to by a copy of at least one plan from RMG in the near future if my notes and drawings and conclysions are lacking, but they are available to order and purchase by anybody. Details already stated.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: des March 23, 2017, 18:20:19
Hi Toby

I've kept quiet on this research 'cos I don't know anything at all about earlier steam tugs, much less those built pre-war, on the other side of the world.  But one item struck me in your last post.

On most (all?  I don't remember) of those tugs that I worked on during construction ("modern" '60's, all steel welded, diesel), the prop shaft itself did not exit from the hull penetration.  Rather, the stern tube was carried right through to the propeller boss - this would obviously be bigger than the shaft itself.  There were inner and outer "stuffing boxes" to provide a double seal against sea water entering the hull through the penetration.  The construction and installation of the stern tube would provide the support for the shaft all the way aft to the propeller hub.

I also noticed on one of your earlier posts that Imara / Perseverance had two shafts & props, but only one rudder - most unusual, as this means the rudder could not be located in line with the prop wash, and therefore would be less effective than two, probably smaller rudders would have been.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 23, 2017, 19:16:58
Hello Des

Good to hear from you!
Hope all is well with you.

What you were saying re outer and inner stuffing tubes I believe is what I was trying to state and perhaps not very well albeit, what we shall call the outer stuffing tube I am not sure went quite the whole length. I am in bed and do do not have info and sketches to hand.  Clearly I am curious as to whether or not A-frames shown and supplied in the Imara kit should be incorporated or not.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: des March 24, 2017, 01:25:42
I guess that whether or not there should be an A-frame to support the outer shaft end (or rather, the outer end of the stern tube) would depend largely on the hull shape, and the distance between where the stern tube exits from the hull, to the propeller.  If the distance is relatively short, then an A-frame would not be needed.  But for greater distances a support would be necessary for the outer end to prevent the prop whipping around (even only by a small amount) and thereby destroying the stern tube outer seal and bearing.

Most of the single-screw tugs I worked on during construction did not have an A-frame outer support;  but most of the twin screw tugs did so.  This would be due to the lack of support for the stern tubes for twin screws, where the stern tubes exit the hull.  For a single screw construction, the stern tube runs inside the skeg beneath the hull, and can be stiffened by welding to one or several of the frame members within the skeg.  You can't do that with a twin-screw arrangement.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 24, 2017, 16:20:00
Sorry that I have not had the time to make any drawings to go along with the text but I shall eventually. Hopefully those building a model and those with one already will readily know the areas and features to which I refer.

I have a moment so thought I would share the research about the superstructure at the stern of Imara/Perseverance.
Essentially of rectangular shape comprising 5 doors and a series of liftable/openable skylight frames.

Most models I have seen online, under either name, feature five  arch-top doors. However,  the original Imara plans show straight-top doors as do the photographs of Perseverance. I think that we can assume that the rather plain doors are the original furniture.

On models these doors feature a porthole/skylight window which is wrong too.   The original plan and the photographs show solid doors without portholes.  The only possible exception is the one door in the aft wall  which gives access to a stair to the engine room.  However, the door to the stair to the crews quarters on the port side does not. So the door on the aft wall is likely without porthole too. From the outside this aft door is marked on the plan to open right to left.

The two doors on the starboard side are to:
Fore door gives access to the hose locker.
Aft door gives access to two latrines.

The two doors on the port side are to:
Fore door gives access to the bosun's store.
Aft door gives access to the stair to the crews accommodation.

On both the fore and aft wall of this superstructure are two large portholes. On the aft wall is the rack for the capstan bars. This is to the left of the door.

With regard to the sloped skylight frames there are errors here.

There are two such frames adjoined to the aft wall. These comprise one liftable lid each,  each lid featuring two portholes/skylights  centrally and horizontally placed side by side.

The similar lids on the one long frame (the length of the structure) on the fore wall are different to the kit plans and all models. The original plan of Imara and the photographs of Perseverance agree.
Along this frame are three openable lids with portholes. However,  rather than the three being identical and the same as those on the aft wall frames and those over the engine room,  they are not.

The three lids comprise two similar ones but not as wide as those on the aft wall and they only have one porthole each centrally placed. Between these is a lid of about 1.5 x width of the outer ones and features two portholes.  While all lids have two hinges and two screw clamps to lock into position this wider one has three hinges and three screw clamps.

On the portside end of the this frame on the fore wall, is a small cupboard of lesser dimensions than the frames and with a door opening right to left.

Hope the information is of interest.

More later.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 24, 2017, 17:13:32
For a great aerial photograph of Perseverance here is a link to fotoflite.


The photo looks average in the link but the quality is great of the purchased photograph or file. They may let you have a file
rather than a printed photograph if you ask them.
I found them very helpful and obliging.

This photograph appeared in the book entitled,  Channel Sweep. However, the file or printed photograph is significantly better. DETAIL CAN BE SEEN!!
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 25, 2017, 14:58:03
Here is a layout of the stern superstructure.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 25, 2017, 17:23:28
Photographic view of a part of the stern superstructure.
the third vent on plan and in photograph. NOT a lamp as in kit.
the straight -edged doors and lack of portholes in them
the liftable skylight and their size and number of portholes
the pipe from the hose locker into the frame

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 26, 2017, 00:51:19
The above drawing (in scale proportion albeit free-hand) made of the original plan and also the photograph show the design of this section for Imara and Perseverance respectively to have been and remained the same.


More will follow soon.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 30, 2017, 05:21:41
At the 1:32 scale the following measurements were ascertained from the original plans; bear in mind that these were taken from a flat drawing and so one needs to place a wide vertical guide at the bow from which to measure  in a straight line a point on the bulwarks, for example, rather than measuring around the curved shape of the bulwarks.

BP measurement is 40.875" / 1038.2mm
OAL is 44.25" / 1124mm

I have just measured the OAL and find that my hull measures only 43 3/8"  or 1100mm rather than the scale measurement just stated above

Do all other Imara /Perseverance owners get the same measurement???

If this is the case,  then albeit only 24mm or 1" it explains the cramped area at the back or front depending on the position selected for the superstructure.

This possible shortness in OAL came to me when deciding to check and mark off the positions for ports, washports, ladders and fairlead and realising on reaching the stern that all was not going to look as per plan or photographs. Clearly a progressive proportional shortening of the position for fittings along the bulwarks will have to be undertaken so that their position in relation to the superstructure etc is as close as possible. No point in having a washport so far in the wrong place that a comparison to the photograph will make this obvious.

Note this means that although the measurements following are scale and correct,  due to the loss of one inch of boat length these will need to be slightly reduced /and/or superstructure positioned /repositioned. For of one has measured and built from bow to stern then all the loss with have to take place in a small curving area at the stern which means that the fourth washport and the ports either side,  the fairlead on the capping and the bollard behind the washport will over- crowd the area where it curves and it will look wrong. For in addition has to be positioned the rope guide built over the rear separate superstructure.

Bow front to the superstructure

Bow to centre of second window and first washport
Bow to second washport centre
Bow to centre of third washport
Bow to centre of fourth washport

Wash port 17mm x 28.5mm
Base of washport at deck level, not above deck; about where rubbing band is fastened.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 30, 2017, 05:30:19
Doors on the model equate to 2ft width so on the model are 18.05mm.

Height of superstructure from the bulwarks capping is 45mm.

Anchor 31.5mm wide and 24mm from base to prong points.  This equates to an anchor fullsize of 39.7" × 30.24".

Foremast is 457.5mm tall.

Rudder height 97.5mm.
Rudder had three stretchers base, middle and upper. These are 4.5mm wide and placed 39mm apart.

Fenders are circular tyre shape in appearance made of 'rope'.
The outer diameter is 30mm and the inner 10.5mm.

On the plan they are held by rope /wire  attached to two eye brackets 51mm apart and the wire/rope length is 30mm to the centre edge of the fender.

All above are supported too by that seen in the photographs of Perseverance.

On the original plan is an accommodation ladder shown on the outside of the bulwarks /hull and also fixings for
it on the bulwarks capping.  On starboard it is placed just forward of the stern superstructure fore wall frames with the skylights.

There is a ladder on the port side too but that is towards midships by  112.5mm further (distance between stern side of one ladder to stern side of other ladder).
Clearly the ladders were only attached when needed. No photograph of them in situ during sailing.

The ladders are shown as having 8 steps.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 30, 2017, 19:33:52
All the information so far applies to Imara and Perseverance.
The re- positioning of things can be seen the on the original plan and is supported by photographs of Perseverance.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby March 30, 2017, 19:59:32
Looking at the starboard side on the original Imara plan and the same in photographs of Perseverance it appears that the doors and windows need altering as well as door handles and repositioning. Also there are two areas in the mid-section which in the kit seems to be represented by mesh but again plan and photos show that instead there are  two two- hinged large panels each comprising a porthole.

Attached is a photo with the some alterations marked in red. There are more changes yet to mark on.

The doors are not plain with a porthole but frame and panel except the door by the stair. The handles are round knob type not long lever type. The doors were double doors with a secondary one which opened inwards. The inner door had horizontal sloping slats like a fixed sun blind louvre style.

The windows are much smaller with no arched top or the horizontal inner beam of the kit windows.  Note spacing of doors and positioning of this all in red.

Am working all these details out and have yet to organise fresh plan. But that in red is correct so far whether building Imara or Perseverance.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 02, 2017, 17:41:43
The first photo shows rope type fenders on Perseverance and these are correct on Imara too. Here note that they are merely fastened to something over the bulwarks capping rather than as per original drawings (second photo), as described earlier with measurements. The brackets for the old way of fastening to the outside of the bulwarks still can be seen on the edge of the coloured band in the full photo of Perseverance.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 02, 2017, 17:52:43
Per plan.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 02, 2017, 18:14:30
Note the sheer of the doors in relation to the vertical and note the size of the windows and their position etc.  This is correct for Imara and Perseverance. The sheer needs to be increased for the whole boat really.

Note the deadlights to the Windows all around the tug. THESE are LATER ADDITIONS and apply to PERSEVERANCE ONLY as is the pipework visible in the snapshot.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 06, 2017, 05:38:50
For PERSEVERANCE, ship's boats are clinker built and not cavel / metal as per Imara.
Also PERSEVERANCE ship's  boats were painted black over white.
Likely the interior of the ship's boats was painted superstructure colour but I am yet not 100% sure. ANY ONE CARE TO COMMENT?

See photo portions attached of port and starboard Perseverance ship's boats showing the black and the different features of the tarpaulins.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 11, 2017, 18:28:58
On the original plan there is a flagstaff at the stern.  It measures 80mm in length and 3.17mm width at the base; tapered to the tip.
This gives a flagstaff in reality of 12ft 6" x 6" or 3.84m x 152mm.

So our 1:32 scale model should give us flag pole dimensions of: 120mm x 4.75mm for our models.


Drawing/photo to follow
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 14, 2017, 16:43:18
Starboard main deck superstructure.
In conjunction with earlier plan image with red markings.

From the front (bow) wall of the structure the first window is positioned 16.5mm in and this window should be 12mm wide single pane flat topped. For Perseverance there needs to be added a strip placed horizontally above the window (all other windows too) as well as a channel, placed either side of the window and extending below, in order to accommodate a sheet metal dead light. ...panel to slide up over the window to protect it.

Then there is a 6mm space followed by an 18mm wide door. The doors in the kit are wrong,  whether building as Imara or Perseverance. The doors were never altered as the original plans of Imara and later photographs of Perseverance prove for they show the same design and position.

The door is frame and panel wooden with brass fittings - handle round knob type for both inner and outer doors; each entrance features double doors.  On the plan and in the photos it is strangely evident that the door horizontals appear to follow the sheer. As demonstrated in earlier in this topic the photo and the plan agree. Will be interesting making a door with non 90° angles.  Note that beneath these doors are steps of grating.

After this door  there is a space of 28.5mm followed by another window of similar size to the first. Then another space of 18mm and the final door of similar style to the first albeit here the sheer is slightly different.

I am trying to create a legible drawing and will upload when completed.
Height wise -doors/windows - there is some adjustment needed. The next door to follow and which is located in the recess of the stair to the Upper deck is much higher placed that indicated.

This does mean, of course, that the riveting detail has to be sanded off adjusted and made logical in quite a number of places.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 17, 2017, 02:54:22

I have been looking at the main deck superstructure and have found it difficult to determine two matters.
1: Were window frames generally made of metal or of wood.
2: Were portholes fastened with countersunk screws or bolts.

Obviously question one helps to know whether to use anything and paint the frames or make from wood and varnish them.

Question two I ask because such was not stated on the plan and in the photographs I have of Perseverance the screw/bolts are very prominent to view rather than being subtle.

Snap shots attached.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 17, 2017, 20:12:33
I thought that I would make a few measurements of the main superstructure and place cut Paper strips to represent the doors, covers and windows.

What a game!

The superstructure I have is of very poor moulding quality with a number of distortions. Clearly all the rivet effect is going to have to be scrapped too and then redone in more suitable positions. In fact it will likely be quicker to build a superstructure than correct all the mistakes of the moulded thing.
I have already cambered and sheered the whole so that it sits to the deck.

If we take the starboard side for reference we find that the lower stern section is the correct length and depth. The next section all the way to the front is 5mm short in height; to be added to the roof, not below at the base of the wall.
Then the first part of this section up to the stairway is short. This can be corrected by adding and have the stair moved forward and its rake corrected to the proper angle.  This brings all into line with the original plans. It reduces the stair recess area to the correct dimensions too. 

Now the fore section is 5mm short in length.

See attached photo. I have not stuck paper on to represent the windows albeit one is shown in pencil roughly.

The davits for the ship's boats are totally wrong whether building as Imara or Perseverance. They do not sit on top of the superstructure but as marked on the attached are hinged to the superstructure wall.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: model tugman April 18, 2017, 10:07:36
Are you glad you started this one Toby?
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 18, 2017, 10:52:15

In a word, NO.

It just goes to show that proper and accurate plans scaled to suit and scratch -building a model is less arduous, quicker and more rewarding.  Frankly there seems to be very few kits that are well designed and without errors in how they say to build them. Parts not matching to instructions and even marked out decks not fitting the hull on some models.  Accuracy regardless of producer in any country seems to be lacking. It further shows how many modelers are not that fussed about accuracy and obviously do not research. If I had paid the kit price i would be more than fuming and would feel ripped off. When one pays a very high price one expects it to be correct. ....surely that is why it is so priced. . It likely means all models of even Imara,  let alone Perseverance,  are wrong for no one has said that they did any research and found out that similar to me. In fact no one has commented, questioned or queried on this thread at all, except John and Peter,  albeit there have been more than 1000 views; and yet I believe that you said this was a popular model.

Perhaps better if producers concentrated on  building accurate full length hulls only.

My aim was to have this tug built in a jiffy and have something to go 'ponding' with whilst I returned to Danube. But something doesn't mean anything will do! I thought that my research would just be a leaving off or adding this or that which would turn the model into Perseverance rather than Imara. I had no idea I was going to have to get the boat correct before starting. It has taken longer to get this little model sorted than building and adding all those rivet heads to the huge Danube model to the stage that it is at.

I will just have a Laphroaig and then I may be able to

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: des April 18, 2017, 23:59:32
Hi Toby

The problem with producing low-cost model kits (that is, priced so they can sell, not necessarily for the mass market) is one of cost of tooling.  Frequently sacrifices must be made regarding accuracy simply in order to be able to produce a mould for a reasonable cost - the mould must be made such that the product can be removed from the mould, so "tumble-homes" at the stern will almost always be flattened out.  But I can't see why a moulding cannot have accurate length, width and height, door and window placement, etc.  Also, manufacturing tolerances can result in parts not fitting correctly.  Different kits will have different problems, which we modellers must "accept", no matter how reluctantly.

As an example, for my project the hull is fibreglass and most of the rest is styrene, with many parts pre-cut.  I accurately cut out and cleaned up the pre-cut foredeck piece, but then found I had to re-shape the whole of the bow curvature - and then I found that the hull is not symmetrical as the deck piece will only fit one way up.  I still haven't worked out how I'm going to hide this as the project progresses.  Similarly, the stern quarters of the main deck piece did not fit the corners of the hull, and had to be shaped by more than 6mm on one side to get both corners to fit the hull moulding.

Still, as they say, press on rewardless.

Good luck.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 19, 2017, 03:36:00
Hello Des

A friend was highlighting to me the same issue. He had the hull ready from the kit and placed the shafts etc. Then he cut the deck to the lines and found that this bore no relation to the hull.  Then stern pieces he thought he would cut outside of the line and then trim. The pieces were yet small and not to the correct curve albeit the lines were pre-printed on the plastic!

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 19, 2017, 05:10:36

That there are only three windows (and wrong type of) in the front wall of  the main deck superstructure,  when obviously (considering the use and layout of the rooms) there would have been, actually were and ought thus on all models to be FOUR !

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 19, 2017, 16:59:56
Tonight's titbit of information is that the two coal scuttles, one port and one starboard a midships, should be 75mm astern of where they are shown on the model plan. That is they ought to be opposite the lamp room door (starboard) and Lascar washplace door (port) ; just stern of the centre of each door. The scuttle is, on the original plan, shown to be seated in a rectangular rather than square frame of wood within the surrounding planks.

This position makes more sense because, below are the bunkers.


PS any one who wants me to upload an image; let me know.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 19, 2017, 17:19:51
The grating over the rudder steering quadrant at the stern needs modification. Within the 'frame' about the grating, yes, there are four sections but the outer sections are 5 x  the width of the inner sections.
All framing being equal.
Can upload a tracing if any one is interested.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 20, 2017, 15:27:46
Quick hand-drawn sketch but to scale with detail in the correct places.
Note the different positions of the port and starboard windows.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 20, 2017, 15:45:59
Quick sketch but to scale of the grating over the rudder quadrant.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 20, 2017, 20:05:46
I have just noticed in my notes the reference to Deck Lights, the equivalent I assume to a porthole in the the planking /decking of the ship.  It appears that this tug  has two at the stern, one port and one starboard between the bollard and the hawser rack/cage.

These lights as far as I can grasp were of  prismatic glass and provided better light for below decks.

Anyone here share anything about this subject. Were they a common feature  in 1930s?
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 27, 2017, 18:12:37
I have fixed in the motors. Using two Johnson brushed motors 6-12v which have high torque and low revs.  Yet to test the speed of each with a gizmo.

The boat is in the bath; for I am just testing the hull  for leaks.
Clearly the lead shot and epoxy I filled the skeg with has lowered the stern some and the bow is quite high. There are the batteries and smoker to add and the mechanism for raising and lowering the anchor so have yet to arrange and sort the layout for ease and ballast.
More painting to be done as only grey primer on at the moment.  There is the riveting to correct and to add and to remove here and there before top coat.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby April 27, 2017, 18:28:27
What have other modellers done concerning the riveting effect of the hull plates?

Have any corrected/enhanced/altered the effect at all?

At present I am concerned with that up to and including the rubbing band.

I ask, because whilst I was downing a cuppa my eye was suddenly drawn to the size of a number of plates on the hull. For example, the first long plate I measured was 153mm in length.  Well at 1:32 scale that would equate to a plate of 4986mm in length; or in proper measurement, 16ft !
Can this be? Were plates of such a length used? I would have thought 8ft x4ft would have been more usual?  In 1:32 scale that generally would be 75mm (76.2mm)?

Opinions anyone?

It would be nice to hear from someone for there appears to be a deafening silence from members concerning this topic;  rather surprising if it is a popular model and there had been 1300+ views too.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 06, 2017, 17:02:01
Spotted this picture online.

I have added arrows in order to indicate errors whether anyone builds the model as Imara or Perseverance.

HULL: wash ports to big and have hinges on the front and the spacing is adrift.
The Panama ports are in the wrong place and too high.
The name is high.
SUPERSTRUCTURE saloon /deck level:
Wrong type of windows, the second door and second window on the port side are the wrong way around, only 3 windows on the front instead of 4, wrong type of doors on the whole structure, and which do not have port holes, wrong type of door handles, no hinged flaps with port holes beyond the steps,  completely the wrong type  of boat davits as they should not sit on the upper deck but rather be fastened to the superstructure wall beneath pivoted do that they can move forward.

The second superstructure is missing a vent on the roof above the latrines and has the wrong type of doors.

Also it would seem that tyres were never used as fenders but rather a rope type as indicated in original plan and in photographs

For Perseverance the hawse rack is removed.
The cowl vent in top of the companion way is correct for Imara and initial period when bought by RN and changed to Perseverance but as Perseverance this was changed to a much taller version and later changed to a different type altogether and similar to that found on the second superstructure at the stern.

Hope this gives an idea of the what is needed with this tug just as basic.

I am currently re organising the rivet detail on the hull.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 09, 2017, 17:57:21
Starboard hull riveting now corrected and completed. Plates now largely 3"x 1 1/2" in size which looks a far better proportion than the double length plates of 6" which equates to 16ft!

I have attached three 'phone pics taken during a pva riveting break.
Since these were taken,  note,  that I have added rivets to the under the rushing band in order that it looks fastened to the hull!

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 09, 2017, 18:05:04
How many builders of this model or generally when using a fiberglass hull  strengthen the keel inside?

I ask for whilst riveting I noticed that the bottom of the boat is flexible and certainly more than I would have thought or like.

I have fibre glass cloth and resin but wondered whether to strengthen with strips of wood .....sorry of lollipop/ sucker /Ice-cream sticks. ..glueing or epoxy or fibreglassing them in even if putting fibre glass cloth over the top.

There are the batteries to consider so strengthening I think would be wise.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 09, 2017, 19:12:48
I was going to start the port side but at 4am I think it must be bed time.

Nearly finished the bulwarks.  Have the riveting and two Panama ports to place and cut out on the starboard side and some general sanding.

I did want to increase the angle of lean of the bulwarks but not sure how or if it would be possible at this stage. The bulwarks seem rather upright than slightly inclined.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: 2tugboats May 13, 2017, 07:16:34
I had thought that your getting the rivets to scale a bit too much. . .but seeing your finished
work I can see that you are right on. Looking at the hull I find that it pulls me into being
able to experience the real tug as she was. Your tug's spirit is strong and demands one's
eye to really check it out and feel the presence. . .

Thank you for such quality attention to details Toby,
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 13, 2017, 09:18:48
Thank you Michael.
Once painted hopefully all will look OK.  A little bit of weather too.
Just oordered some materials to make A-frames with.
I have strengthened the floor of the hull with lollipop sticks resin and fibre glass.  Today I hope to finish that and layout the batteries and smoker etc and anchor winch!
I am just changing the port bulwarks sheer to match the starboard and then  i can finish the Stern and work from there working out the plates and rivets with the aid of photos.

Re the propellers, no reply as to whether other builders have kept the props at 70mm or used 90mm 4-blade.

We are getting there ......I think. .....

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 17, 2017, 19:20:04
Capping glued on now that the bulwark height and sheer has been adjusted. Just finishing the rake of the stern bulwark.
I have only noticed the capping looks rather wide,  for I note on the original plan that the capping is the width of the fairlead.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby May 17, 2017, 19:22:00
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby June 04, 2017, 18:25:06
Just when I thought that I was getting to a close on the hull, I happened to 'zoom in' on a photo only to notice that the stern rubbing band needs to be altered. This in turn led me then to see that the whole rubbing band on my kit hull is only 3mm in width generally, which equates to 3 3/4", or for you mods, 96mm.  After a moment or two I realised that the width needs to be 7mm (equates to 8 7/8") all round and that the rubbing band is of wood,  and not a pressed metal 'c' sort of shape, which is held in situ by angle iron and rivets above and below.  This makes more sense of the plan markings and what can be now interpreted in the photos.

Talking to the Oracle on matters tugs,  George, he agreed that from the images of plan and photos, the stern does, instead of being solely metal, comprise a timber 'buffer /cushion. All this timber has a metal strap on the rubbing face.

What have other modelers done at this point? I surely am not the first to need an answer to the matter?

 And re creating angle iron, either here about the rubbing band or on the inside of the bulwarks or around the base of the superstructure, does anyone have any tips as to how to curve angle iron (about 2 or 3mm) around corners,  whether the angle iron be in plastic or brass, without distorting the shape of the angle?????????
Tips gratefully received.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby June 04, 2017, 18:27:26
Here is a snap shot of the stern

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby June 04, 2017, 18:45:07
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: 2tugboats June 04, 2017, 21:31:44
Very super Toby. Your stern rubbing band looks great. I think that the steel band is just a 6 inch strip
of 1/2 inch flat on the full size tug. One way to make one to scale would be to use "tin snips"
and cut out a strip from 1/16" sheet, hammer to flat, and clean up with file. Scale carriage bolts for
that size can be found at a live steam locomotive site.

To bend angle iron, full size, we used a mechanical roller jig to bend angle iron. In model size,
I would think that a roller set-up would be needed for Perfect bends.

Great work Toby and thank you for the sharing and great ideas for my thinking,
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: des June 05, 2017, 15:16:17
Hi Toby

On those tugs that I worked on during my apprenticeship, the rubbing band was formed by welding two parallel, steel flat strips welded to the hull, thus forming the "channel".  I don't recall the dimensions, but 5 or 6 inches seems "right".  These were usually cut from plate steel, so no rolling was necessary to obtain the curvature required to fit the hull.

A heavy baulk of timber would be driven into the channel by the shipwrights, then bolted into place using vertical bolts through the steel flats and the timber baulk.

A steel flat bar was then fixed to the exposed face of the timber, using large screws (3/4 inch diameter?) with countersunk heads for a flush finish.  These were installed in a staggered fashion.

On later tugs (mid 1970's) the timber baulk was replaced by very large rubber sections, without the facing strip.

Hope this helps.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby June 05, 2017, 16:08:38
Hello Des.

Glad you are not caught up in the Melbourne business.

Thanks for the info and yes it does help and aid my understanding.

We will get this little tug finished eventually.

I saw on YouTube earlier a video claiming to be footage of a model of Perseverance at a club's lake in the North of England.  All I can say is that if that was representative of Perseverance then mine must be the ask example of the Titanic.
Each to their own, of course, but some obviously don't care. 

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: thamestug June 06, 2017, 01:27:12
“Each to their own, of course, but some obviously don't care. “

Modellers build their models, whatever they are, for different reasons, for different purposes, and under different conditions and facilities. I haven’t seen the footage of the model of Perseverance to which you refer but I am pretty sure  that the model is probably somebodies pride and joy. They have been given or bought a tug kit. They have built that model to the best of their ability, given that they may have various dexterity issues, eyesight issues, built it on a kitchen table in a tower block with no access to any form of workshop facility.There may also be financial and time limitations to what he or she can achieve.  They have built the model as it came from the box, perhaps their first model ever, have no knowledge, perhaps no interest in the fact that it is not 100 percent correct in detail. They have finished it, got it afloat and are presumably enjoying the experience. Their pleasure comes from using it on the lake. With encouragement they may well go on to build another. It is a hobby which surely means there  should be some degree of relaxation and enjoyment involved.

Obviously those who want the thing absolutely 100 percent right in every detail are also getting enjoyment from their project. My personal view here is how far does this go. If you are going to put said model in a glass case to be admired that is absolutely fine. However in my experience a model built to absolutely scale dimensions with very fine fittings will not last long if you then employ it to tow a 16 feet long model tanker around a windy lake. How does this type of modeller, and I do admire their efforts and tenacity, come to terms with putting said model into non scale water [look at bow wave effect of models in films to illustrate my point], non scale wind and sea conditions. The rolling motion of most model tugs at rest on even relatively calm lakes would in real life probably be enough to throw crew members right across the deck and break every bone in their bodies. If these models are displayed at exhibitions etc at anything but the highest level I have yet to see any judge walking around with shipyard plans checking every detail. Joe public is more likely to admire the model generally, possibly appreciate the skills involved. His wife or girlfriend, or both, will comment on the colour scheme, divert the kids from trying to move tow hooks etc, and they will move on possibly after commenting ‘yes I remember seeing the real one at Gravesend when I was a kid’ or similar. . They will not probably know or even less care that there were only five simulated rivets in that item when there should have been six. I have heard the comment ‘ wonderful detail but two yards from the waters edge and you wont be able to see it anyway’. HOWEVER if you have built this and displayed it the pleasure and satisfaction is all yours.

Similarly the modeller who builds his tugs with minimum fine detail and is only interested in tug towing competitions and builds strongly and powerfully accordingly. [ A comment here is that I have seen videos of tugs taking up slack tow lines with a speed and force that would probably have, in real life, immediately broken the towing hawser, if not ripping the towing gear out of the tug and the bitts out of the towed ship.] BUT they are enjoying themselves.

The modeller whose only interest is the actual build, gives it a test run and sells it on, to fund his next build. Likewise. His form of personal enjoyment.

 There are hundreds of variations and combinations of all the above within the hobby. There is room for all.

A long winded post I know but I do feel strongly that we, as a hobby, cannot afford to denigrate in any way , shape or form the habits and efforts of other modellers if we wish to see what may be a dwindling hobby, as far as the younger persons are concerned, possibly flourish and continue to give  most of us a great deal of personal pleasure and hopefully ensure an ongoing supply of components and kits from manufacturers. [Remember the guy in the tower block with no facilities for scratch building?]
I will no doubt now be shot down and crash and burn but hey it’s a personal opinion and I do still enjoy MY form of modelling.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: model tugman June 06, 2017, 02:26:49
Well said Pete, I fully concur matey.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: TERRY June 06, 2017, 03:43:51
I also fully agree, well said Pete.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby June 06, 2017, 06:50:11
My ploy to finally have written something that has spurred a few into commenting on this thread, which has had in excess of 2000 views but silence with regard to comments, has had a reaction. Those who actually know me will tell you how encouraging I am of all creative activity anyone tries whether it be music,  art or modeling, for we are all learning and struggling in trying to achieve that we want and yes baulked by finances,  tools,  how to do,  and getting the information/plans in the first place etc.
Don't I know!

A pity some of the questions in the thread were met with silence.  However,  a great thank you to those who did most helpfully post a thought and to those who over months have replied to questions privately.

My tugs will be towing too; hopefully.

Now any chance of excitement over the more boaty questions.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: des June 06, 2017, 16:51:07
I see the same arguments in the Model Railway press regarding "rivet counters" vs "the average Joe".  There is no right or wrong here, and we know from previous posts that Toby is a rivet counter to the max.  It isn't my thing, but good luck to him.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: olscuzbut June 06, 2017, 19:07:01
Bang on thamestug.  To each his own desires and definitions. 
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby June 06, 2017, 19:22:53
Which is, I believe, exactly what I said in my opening gambit.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 05, 2017, 12:55:23
Bought Mobile Marine Models a-frames or what they term prop shaft supports. Seem to be a nice quality and sturdy and certainly better than the distorted white metal versions in the kit.  The service was quick albeit over charge on postage by £3 even allowing for envelope cost and VAT on the postage and envelope.

I have cut and filed one to shape. Have yet to make the feet and fasten.


: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 05, 2017, 12:58:42
Poor light and mobile 'phone camera.  I shall try to upload other photos in due course.
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 05, 2017, 13:00:08
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: model tugman July 06, 2017, 02:49:47
I would say definitely Riveted Toby.👍
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 06, 2017, 02:57:54
Thank you George,
I shall make plates/feet with rivet effect.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 12, 2017, 11:21:51
Whilst I was having a bit of a tidy up today I, for some strange reason,  decided to weigh the white metal fittings that are meant to be used on and above deck. I must admit that I was rather surprised by what to me seemed excessive weight.  The supplied moulded superstructure, funnel, boats weighs 703g /1lb 8 3/4oz and the white metal weighs in total 1378g / 3lbs 6oz. The funnel rim alone weighs 76g / 2 3/4oz which, so high above deck, must be the wrong place to add weight on a model when we try to build hull-heavy rather than top-heavy.

Does it seem a lot of weight for this 1/32 scale tug to other members thinking?

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: des July 12, 2017, 16:32:39
Hi Toby

My understanding is that your Imara/Perseverance is about 1105 mm overall length;  this is the same length as my Model Slipways AZIZ.  But your Imara has a broader beam than my AZIZ.  My AZIZ ended up with a total displacement of around 10.5 kg, so I am guessing that your Imara will end up somewhat heavier - probably 11 or 12 kg.  On that basis, I don't think that your 1.3 kg of white metal castings is likely to be a problem.

Also, even though the funnel top is heavy and relatively high, and the rest of the white metal is all above deck, there will be much more weight low down in the hull from motors, batteries, RC stuff, and ballast which will provide stability.

If other modellers had found that the weight of the funnel top casting was such as to affect stability you would expect that they would have made some comment along those lines on this or other forums.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 13, 2017, 00:56:29
Good to hear from you Des,

Likely you are correct about others commenting, should they have found the weight to have caused the boat to be top heavy.

I shall look for videos on YouTube to see how models sail. I suppose I have just thought always that the lighter the top and the more ballast you can have gives the best stable cutting through the water without any bobbing about even in rippled or choppy pond waters.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: deep diver July 14, 2017, 05:49:37
Hi Toby

I have just came across you Build log for the Imara/Perseverance,

Some time back in the early 90's I purchased a hull of the Perseverance along with the templates of the deck and deck housing's from South West Models, (model now out of production) so far I have only placed the deck beam's into the hull and will be starting to drill out the prop shaft "A" frames and the shaft into the hull.

Looking forward to you updates

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby July 14, 2017, 09:11:06
Hello Fred,

Thank you for your comment to my post concerning the Imara / Perseverance tug. 

I acquired a second-hand kit cheap and expected it to be a quick build compared to my other boats. It would have been too if I just wanted to build any old thing lacking in accuracy to the actual ship but I don't see the point in that unless one is just building a model boat with a nice appearance and then renaming it too. 4 weeks build time I should have thought ample.

However,  with a little research as you will read in my two comments/threads on this forum,  one finds that there is much to change whether one wants the model to be Imara or Perseverance.

Soon I hope to show the hull and deck as it ought to be for both boats because they are the same.

I assume you have the twin screw version and not the single screw version.  THE DOUBLE SCREW IS THE CORRECT VERSION.
The full-size ship was never a single-screw vessel.

You will need to change the rivet effect of the hull plating and match both sides.  DO NOT CUT OUT 6 WASH PORTS and DO NOT PUT THE PANAMA PORTS WHERE SHOWN or PUT THE PANAMA RIMS on the outside of the bulwarks as per kit instruction or models online IT IS ALL WRONG.

Have fun with your hull build. I have 75 mm brass props and they ought to be OK for the pond but likely will get a pair of 90mm which would be correct scale. As to whether the 90mm would be even better than the 75mm at the pond no one has commented about this.

I may have to update a few measurements stated concerning washport and Panama port distances along the bulwarks. But I am waiting until I have finished the hull. A slight compromise here and there may be needed to compensate for hull length of the kit etc.

Keep us updated with your build.

Let me know whether you intended to finish the ship as Imara or Perseverance.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: deep diver July 14, 2017, 10:29:45
Hi Toby

Thank you for your reply, I intend to finish her as the Perseverance twin screw, a member on Model Boat Mayhem sent me some photo's of his SWM Perseverance see enclosed photo (I hope) I think I will have to talk with NMM to see if they would send me the deck plans for her, as I have no plans to work from.

 I am also building along side her Mobil Model Marine Lady "T" as they seem to have a passing resemblance,

Looking forward to your up-dates

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: marinaru_ro September 24, 2017, 06:36:46
Absolutely excellent thread so far Toby. Thanks!
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby September 24, 2017, 07:11:56
Thank you George.

When I have the Drifter completed I shall return to working on the Perseverance.

: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: marinaru_ro September 24, 2017, 09:58:09
Please do so, i'd love to read more on your research work.
It took me four years to redraw the plans for a romanian WW2 destroyer built after british Shakespeare class leaders. I have also bought several plans from Mr Michell at NMM.
I really apreciate your work!
: Re: Researching Imara/Perseverance 2017 Greenwich Archive
: Toby September 24, 2017, 10:33:27
It will likely be a few weeks for I have several boats on the go and I have to be in Germany for one week as well. As soon as I have done more to the boat I shall share on the forum.