Subject:
|
Re: USS Duluth - Hull design innovation!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build.military
|
Date:
|
Mon, 10 Mar 2003 01:49:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
575 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.build.military, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
>
> That really looks excellent, and the technique lends itself
> especially well for the "regular" curves on US non-capital
> warships. Can you achieve a limited outward flare as well,
> perhaps with a second level of shim-bricks as you use to
> hold the contour there? I'm looking forward to seeing the
> Mizzou mockup in that regard.
There is a limited amount of flare in the very bow and aft section, but the
pictures don't do justice. The "ribs" are staggered one brick forward for each
two bricks in height, giving a slight flare near the bow. The bow of the
Missouri is almost twice a tall and will hopefully allow for a much bigger
flare..
> A few thoughts and questions, for the future:
>
> What prospect, if any, does this hold out for a detailed
> interior?
I don't see a reason why you couldn't put an interior into a ship like this.
basically I'd have to build a frame and then fill up the interior - just like
the real thing.
> Do you anticipate any problems arising when you increase
> the size of the system, effectively, by 64? (4x4x4) I'm
> mostly thinking of the 1-stud "holders" that look plenty
> solid at this level, but may begin to "separate" at larger
> sizes (which is a problem I encountered with every ship
> above about 4 feet in length). For some reason those darn
> bricks love to work themselves out of place!
The GMLTC's train modules measure 60" by 40" and we don't seem to have too many
problems, unless they get banged around a lot. When in doubt about
bricks separating, I usually run technic beams vertically to maintain
compression. I'll do the same if I run into separation and stress problems.
> A thought on the deck: Have you considered tiling the
> interior structure (where possible) to limit the amount
> of stress on the hull? I know you're using the 2x2 boat
> bottom plates, but when the hull and deck get larger it
> will strongly benefit from the additional area of contact
> per point. As you've no doubt already discovered, deck
> separation is one of the most constant concerns as size
> increases.
The deck rests on the cross members of the ship only in the very middle (dark
gray tiles and red half studs to "lock" it down. The rest of the deck is
basically one long plate that is bowed upwards at either end of the ship. The
only contact with the hull is at the deck line, where it rests on the inside
edges of thin wall "panels" (the entire top edge of the hull is 1x2x1 thin wall
panels). It is held in place simply by gravity, with the thin walls keeping it
from moving. It's a really tight fit and there's no separation whatsoever, even
when picking up the ship from one end.
The 2x2 boats studs are mainly used where the deck goes from an even number of
studs to an odd. I also used some to keep scratching to a minimum when I set the
deck on my dining room table.
> I love the Kingfishers. Sorry, I know it's "just a detail,"
> but those are great. The aerials and the color balance
> of the overall ship are just marvelous. I can't wait to
> see where all of this is going!
Me too. I had never thought of building in this scale before and I think it
worked out exceptionally well. I haven't built a ship in ten years and this is
the best I've done by far... can't wait to get startyed on larger projects...
Thanks for the comments - always welcomed of course!
Dan
> all best
>
> LFB
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: USS Duluth - Hull design innovation!
|
| (...) That really looks excellent, and the technique lends itself especially well for the "regular" curves on US non-capital warships. Can you achieve a limited outward flare as well, perhaps with a second level of shim-bricks as you use to hold the (...) (22 years ago, 9-Mar-03, to lugnet.build.military)
|
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
