Author Topic: Naval tugs  (Read 22970 times)

0 Members and 15 Guests are viewing this topic.

sea monkey

  • Site Supporter
  • Admiral Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #45 on: July 05, 2019, 23:39:08 »
Thatís looking great Jeno
For some reason our members have become quite quiet lately - plenty of viewers but not many comments.
Keep the photos coming, we are always interested in projects like yours.
Steve

des

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #46 on: July 06, 2019, 02:52:35 »
I'm interested to know how members make their hulls - especially for RC, where internal space is necessary for motors and battery, etc;  and where weight is a necessary consideration so that the model actually floats.

I've just started out making a hull using the frame and plating method;  I've only partially framed the aft end only, and already I'm getting worried about weight.

I've checked out Jeno's photos, which show a typical deck support frame, but the hull seems bereft of any internal structure to give it shape.  So I'm guessing it is fibreglass.

I really don't want to make a mould for fibreglass hull.  Nor do I want to use the bread and butter method.  I have zero experience with fibreglass moulding; and bread and butter is too heavy due to the thickness of the hull sides and bottom.

Des.

JEno

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #47 on: July 06, 2019, 04:27:18 »
Des,
 You are correct that my ARS is a fiberglass hull. I have also done a planked hull and scale makes a huge difference with weight considerations when doing so. That said, what scale are you working in, and what kind of a ship are you building...warship( destreyer battleship ect) merchant or working ship ( tug ect). The smaller the scale, the more careful you have to be to calculate your weights. One way to estimate your needs is to estimate the required finished weight to get your model to ride at the waterline. You should be able to do this by scaling your displacement. Next estimate the weight of your components, motor(s), radio gear, batteries and sundries. The difference between the two weights is approximately the allowed weight of the COMPLETED hull. The are numerous threads about doing this over on the RC Groups forum (sorry Moderator).
I hope this helps.

des

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #48 on: July 06, 2019, 15:09:12 »
Hi Jeno

Yep - done all that.  I'm making a hull for a 1970's era twin screw tug, in 1:50 scale.  Calculated total displacement is around 4.5 kg, based on cross-sectional area of each frame below waterline, and spacing between frames.

So far I've got the aft end (around 40% of the total length) mostly framed up - this is currently weighing in at 200 g - so far so good, it seems.  I'm thinking that the full frame will be a bit less than 500 g;  then the hull sheeting and deck will probably bring it up to around 800 - 1000 g.

Then there's the upperworks, detailing, paint, motors & drives, battery, etc.  Plus ballast to bring it down level onto its lines.

I think I'm okay so far, but I may need to grind out some frames once the hull sheathing is done and it becomes more self-supporting.

Des.

JEno

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #49 on: July 07, 2019, 03:48:00 »
Des,
You definitely want your frames to be open rather than solid. 1) for the weight savings, 2) for access to as much on the inner hull as possible. You super structure should be a s light as possible, I have been using a lot of Sintra, expanded PVC board ( sign board ,100") and styrene. It sound like you should have a good weight reserve to play with.

JEno

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #50 on: August 16, 2019, 14:22:08 »
Here is a little more detailed view of my ARS

des

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #51 on: August 17, 2019, 00:20:46 »
Looks good.  Certainly different from the average harbour tug.

JEno

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #52 on: August 19, 2019, 16:44:44 »
Des,
 Thank you. She had two sisters that served the Australian Navy, The Caledonian Salvor and the Cambrian Salvor, respectively BARS 1 and 2. The former became the Sudbury II out of British Columbia, and her sister also worked out of BC under several names. Both can be seen at NavSource .org

des

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #53 on: August 20, 2019, 03:47:14 »
Thanks for that JEno.  Both Caledonian and Cambrian Salvors were built in the US,  and transferred to the Royal Navy (British) during WW2 under the Lend Lease programme.  Both were subsequently transferred to the Royal Australian Navy but were never commissioned, hence they never assumed the HMAS prefix - they were instead operated by the Commonwealth Marine Salvage Board.  Both were sold around 1958.

I found a couple of old, grainy B&W photos - but nothing I'd like to use for building a model.

Des.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2019, 03:50:24 by des »

JEno

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Naval tugs
« Reply #54 on: August 21, 2019, 04:40:41 »
Des,
 I used plans for "later" Diver class units, plus I found some odd plans that showed the stern king post and winch arrangements. All in all, enough to build her with.
You are spot on on their histories, I'll add that both went on to British Columbia to serve commercially for a number of years.
Just took some evening photos.