|
Post by Achtung!! on Oct 30, 2008 9:34:54 GMT 1
Did a bit of jumping ahead last night to give me a bit of a break. Started builidng the main gun last night - I assume its Anton and these next four consecutive issues will all be the same guns.
I attached the three uprights on the main base- and I noticed that the parts were very sloppy fit had a struggle keeping them vertical. Anyone else had this problem?
I wasnt too sure where to put this thread.
|
|
|
Post by swanrail on Oct 30, 2008 11:41:07 GMT 1
Just checked mine and they are reasonably tight, but not push tight. Perhaps it is the humidity that changes it, if so, leave in a damp area for a few hours for the wood to expand slightly and it will tighten up! (we have heavy rain here at the moment and very muggy and cold, so humidity is high).
|
|
|
Post by Daniel on Oct 30, 2008 12:51:04 GMT 1
just finished mine about half an hour ago, all fit reasonably well, a little loose but all worked out fine in the end
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Nov 17, 2008 22:56:39 GMT 1
Hello sailors of all seas! I come to share with you the way how I "mechanized" the main turrets... After many fruitless attempts! So, first I bought for EUR2.25 a threated tap connector from Gardena, a German company specialized in gardening equipment (for those in Britain, this is the link: www.gardena.co.uk/catalog/index.cfm) "Why?" will you say; well, it has just the perfect diameter: 38mm. Using a regular 40 mm tube means destroying parts of the reinforcements located on both sides of the side walls that later receive the photo-etched elements. And we wouldn't like doing so, would we? I followed Markus' instructions (may he be praised for his long, long and kind patience -- Danke noch mein Freund!!) and telling me servos rotate to 200 degrees with the notch inside, I worked out the followings: a) the ring (that's what remains of the threated tap once cut and sanded... not much of it. All that for EUR2.25?! ) has to be of 4mm high on one side to get the barrels parallel, 6.6mm above deck; b) opposite side of the ring was brought to 6.5mm to obtain a smooth 25 degrees slope... I chose to opt for a less aggressive slope than the original 30° the main guns were reaching, but if you prefer to match to what was once reality, raise the ring to 7mm instead of 6.5. As one said: "A drawing is the Mother of All Speeches" You can print it on tracing paper to use as a pattern. If this RGB version isn't satisfying, post me a mail and I'll send you a CMYK one for better printing. Be careful anyway. As I had to move the axis further behind its original place, it might occur now the guns with a 30° slope will be hampered by the roof!! Damn, problems, always problems... but none that cannot be resolved!
|
|
|
Post by markus on Nov 18, 2008 20:42:15 GMT 1
great job, robert markus
|
|
|
Post by swanrail on Nov 19, 2008 0:13:15 GMT 1
Brilliant Robert, good job there. Like the professional drawings too.
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Nov 19, 2008 21:53:26 GMT 1
Thanks Swanrail but I haven't any merit there as I am a graphic artist!
|
|
|
Post by jim on Nov 21, 2008 19:14:55 GMT 1
looking ahead at the german site it appears in issues 118 & 119 are the main and secondary armament barrels. appears to be plastic with stainless steel sleeves. no facility for elevation.
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Nov 21, 2008 20:26:07 GMT 1
looking ahead at the german site it appears in issues 118 & 119 are the main and secondary armament barrels. appears to be plastic with stainless steel sleeves. no facility for elevation. The German site, is: www.subifa.de/heftvorschau/die_bismarck_aktuell.htmisn't it? Well Jim, that the barrels are made of plastic or in any other material matters very little, you know... as it is the RING which, by its different heights (from 4 to 6.5/7 mm) elevates the guns. Weight has no much concern here. But thank you all the same for your remark! Robert
|
|
|
Post by jim on Nov 21, 2008 21:11:31 GMT 1
forgive me , for a long time peeps have been wondering what the barrels would be (turned brass, aluminium, plastic) I simply made an observation. who mentioned weight? the turret ring has got nothing to do with elevation anyway, traverse yes, elevation no. elevation would be dictated by the clearance inside the turret. ( the height of the the turret roof for depression, the clearance of the machinery inside the turret for elevation, and the fact that a gun that size at max elevation needed a clearance of 20 feet below deck to elevate to max) my main point is we got the answer to many questions ,plastic, and stainless steel sleeves which will be painted anyway.
|
|
|
Post by jim on Nov 21, 2008 21:21:50 GMT 1
the barrel is only two thirds of the gun the other third is inside the turret when the barrel goes up the breach goes down which is why after every shot the gun had to be levelled to reload.
|
|
|
Post by jim on Nov 21, 2008 21:42:13 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Nov 21, 2008 22:16:08 GMT 1
Jim, I see you've been on Wikipedia ;D Please have a closer look again at my pictures and drawing... When barrels rest where the ring is 4 mm thick, these are horizontal 6.6mm above the deck. Then, when the turret revolves, it reaches a higher height of the ring (which is fixed to the deck) to 6.5 / 7mm. As guns follow the curve of the ring, they rise along to reach 25/30 degrees. It's as simple as that! Maybe Markus' thread on elevating barrels with his video will explain it better. buildthebismark.proboards52.com/index.cgi?board=markus&action=display&thread=1062Cheers. Robert
|
|
|
Post by stroker on Nov 22, 2008 5:06:06 GMT 1
You guys have way to much time on your hands me thinks :-)
|
|
|
Post by rem2007 on Nov 22, 2008 23:49:24 GMT 1
very cool
|
|