|
Post by swanrail on Dec 5, 2009 0:24:05 GMT 1
Having completed the big cranes, did a trial run with them in situ and an aircraft on its cradle. Immediately noticed that the wings were behind the crane, and with forward motion would be chopped off!!! My fault? well maybe, but then looked more closely at picture 91 on page 322 of issue 140 with a magnifying glass, and lo and behold, theirs is also behind the crane!!! Looked at the shipyard model, and their aircraft wings are level with the bottom of the boat on its cradle on the outboard hangars. Again, looking very closely it is obvious that the aircraft cradle should have been nearly twice as high as that supplied!!!! Be interested to hear from other builders how they overcome this fault, specially Markus.
|
|
|
Post by jim on Dec 5, 2009 2:31:45 GMT 1
wondered that myself, when iI dry run my superstructure's and add the cranes no way that plane is passing the crane
|
|
|
Post by rushzombie on Dec 5, 2009 11:20:16 GMT 1
started the catapult myself and come up with a few problems,i was wondering if the sides of the catapult deck is sloped or not,seen different versions and some are flat sone are sloped,all do not have the top brass plate with the sides bent upwards,anyone got any pictures of the catapult and the decking in that area ?
|
|
|
Post by swanrail on Dec 5, 2009 18:03:01 GMT 1
Go to: www.bismarck-class.dk/shipmodels/german_models/bismarckblohmvoss2.htmlwhere you will find excellant pictures of the shipyard model. Scrolling down are some good views of the aircraft, clearly showing the wings to be clear of the crane. I have also just noticed that the rear of the crane, the cross boom is much lower on the back end than the Hachette variety, which will also alter the clearance needed. So I have two mods to do!! Looking very closely,I can see what has caused the problem. The cradle under the aircraft has been fixed by Hachette to the body of the plane, whereas the official model shows that the cradle was attached further forward, actually to the cross struts under the wings. This will give the extra height needed to clear the crane. Now have an interesting problem in removing my cradle and refitting it in the correct place! In the photos you can also see that the launching run was flat, with wings sloping downwards on either side to follow the slope to the main deck. Hachette decided to lift these wings, which seems to be incorrect. Also notable is that the wings could only be folded down once the aircraft was moved outside of the funnel, must have been quite tricky, especially in bad weather. The launch pad thus appears to have only been a few feet long, must have been some takeoff, with high g.!
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 5, 2009 20:50:19 GMT 1
Thanks for the info Don. I noticed also other areas which differ. Radar aerial not fitted on forward fire control. The control command post also differs on top. I also noticed that domes are fitted on the anti aircraft gun controls. I have also parts I have not yet identified.Some marked in yellow on the plan with a quote will be required later but are never mentioned again. Other plastic parts just delivered with no mention where they should be fitted. I find the pills have helped.
Matt
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 5, 2009 22:18:36 GMT 1
Just had another thought. The photograph in the Anatomy of the ship on page 24 shows the crane as Hachette. As the picture was taken in Grimstadfjord I suggest the crane was in use at this time.In this position it was used to lower the boats into the water to take crew members ashore. When it was required to fly aircraft from the ship the crane was stowed into its lowered position as shown in the photograph Don found. As far as the catapult sledge your guess is as good as mine.
Matt
|
|
|
Post by nm on Dec 5, 2009 23:12:56 GMT 1
Thanks for the info Don. I noticed also other areas which differ. Radar aerial not fitted on forward fire control. The control command post also differs on top. I also noticed that domes are fitted on the anti aircraft gun controls. I have also parts I have not yet identified.Some marked in yellow on the plan with a quote will be required later but are never mentioned again. Other plastic parts just delivered with no mention where they should be fitted. I find the pills have helped. Matt Later alterations to the real ship aren't shown on the model. nm
|
|
|
Post by swanrail on Dec 6, 2009 13:31:42 GMT 1
I have now modified my crane/Araldo as follows: Mod to cradle. The cradle has been moved forward, and glued to the cross struts. This has lifted the aircraft so that the wings are now level with the bottom of the boats on the outside hangar (as per the shipyard model). Aircraft with old crane showing that wings foul the crane, in spite of the lifted aircraft with the modified cradle. Aircraft with modified crane, showing correct clearnace crane Two cranes, one on left as built according to Hachette, one on right modified so that rear rollers ar at a lower angle permitting clearance for the aircraft. This modification agrees with both the shipyard model, as well as the Anatomy of the Bismarck book (page 99).
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Dec 6, 2009 22:50:56 GMT 1
Nice mod and research Don. I'll (try to ) remember that one when I get that far.
|
|
|
Post by Baz on Dec 7, 2009 3:15:44 GMT 1
Many thanks for the head's up Don. Will file this for when the time arrives An little appreciation K from me Baz
|
|
|
Post by swanrail on Dec 7, 2009 23:59:53 GMT 1
Thanks for the kind comments guys, here is another view of the modified aircraft/crane setup. p.s. at this stage, Bissy is starting to look complete, except that I still seem to have several hundred minute brass bits sitting in their frets! As others will have found, some of the frets were greyed out earlier on (i.e. with no part numbers) but these seem to have been forgotten later on, whilst some fo the later instructions mention part numbers which I have had either great difficulty in finding, or else had to make intelligent guesses to what they are on the frets. In the end, guess I shall stop adding bits when I think that is far enough to go, or I get fed up with trying to glue parts on where they can hardly be seen anyway, and I guess if they were not threre then no on would be any the wiser!!!
|
|
|
Post by jim on Dec 8, 2009 21:57:54 GMT 1
apparently the wings were stowed until the catapult was extended, so both planes should have wings folded or find some way to have an extended catapult. bissie carried 4 planes none were ever launched
|
|